Hillary Clinton

• majorspark

  

  Hillary's cackle renders her questioner dazed and confused then if she chooses to answer is followed by bold faced lies. Frightened of prompting another cackle often times the questioner is rendered completely paralyzed to challenging her answer with any follow up questions. Its some sort of defense mechanism.
• MontyBrunswick

  

  majorspark;1778161 wrote:Billionaires and millionaires colluding to manipulate the political process.

  they've been doing that for years. where have you been?
• majorspark

  

  MontyBrunswick;1778652 wrote:they've been doing that for years. where have you been?

  Politicians have been using this for decades to manipulate the masses. Where have you been?
• QuakerOats

  State Dept. delays emails until after first primary states...
  
  
  
  Corruption at the highest levels of government.
  
  Change we can believe in ...
• QuakerOats

  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/29/official-some-clinton-emails-too-damaging-to-release.html
  
  
  
  "Some emails too damaging to release, under any circumstances ...."
  
  
  
  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/issa-fbi-director-would-like-to-indict-clinton-and-abedin/article/2581811
• gut

  QuakerOats;1778965 wrote: "Some emails too damaging to release, under any circumstances ...."

  No worries....after Clinton is elected POTUS she can pardon herself.
• Automatik

  

  http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/government-declares-22-clinton-emails-top-secret/ar-BBoSo4n?ocid=spartanntp
  
  TAKE HER DOWN!
• gut

  And they're saying her server WAS hacked...although maybe they are just operating under that assumption.
  
  Forget, for a minute, that this was SoS Clinton....imagine if this was some staffer doing this with their home server and they'd almost certainly be looking at jail time.
• majorspark

  

  gut;1778987 wrote:And they're saying her server WAS hacked...although maybe they are just operating under that assumption.

  You would think they would have to even if they did not know. Depending on the sensitivity of the information a lot could be at stake. Possibly lives.
  

  gut;1778987 wrote:Forget for a minute, that this was SoS Clinton....imagine if this was some staffer doing this with their home server and they'd almost certainly be looking at jail time.

  I am certain they are made aware of the protocol, laws, and consequences starting on day one of employment. These laws are put in place to govern the unwashed. Seasoned high level government officials should not be subject to such inconveniences.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  People actually believe something would ever happen to Hillary Clinton? Lol.
• QuakerOats

  A democrat resign or get indicted by this regime's AG ? Never.
  
  
  
  REVEALED: OBAMA EMAILED HILLARY 18 TIMES!
  
  FLASHBACK: CLAIMED HE LEARNED FROM MEDIA...
• dwccrew

  

  I really have no clue how people can support Hillary Clinton (some of my family members included). She's the phoniest person I've ever seen in politics, which says a lot. She has been caught in so many lies, scandals, corruption situations. And yet, somehow, people still support her. It's just not logical how people can blindly follow someone like her that has zero character or credibility. Every excuse she comes up with for every situation is obvious deflection or outright lies. Her server was hacked? Please! How many different excuses and how many times will her story change? I mean where there is smoke there is fire....right? At this point, what difference does it make?
• SportsAndLady

  

  dwccrew;1779142 wrote:I really have no clue how people can support Hillary Clinton (some of my family members included). She's the phoniest person I've ever seen in politics, which says a lot. She has been caught in so many lies, scandals, corruption situations. And yet, somehow, people still support her. It's just not logical how people can blindly follow someone like her that has zero character or credibility. Every excuse she comes up with for every situation is obvious deflection or outright lies. Her server was hacked? Please! How many different excuses and how many times will her story change? I mean where there is smoke there is fire....right? At this point, what difference does it make?

  Because women are going to vote for a woman. It's really that simple.
• Spock

  

  My wife is not voting for her
• Belly35

  

  SportsAndLady;1779146 wrote:Because women are going to vote for a woman. It's really that simple.

  i have more faith in women then to think women will be so narrow minded to just vote gender. Voting race didn't work great.
• gut

  SportsAndLady;1779146 wrote:Because women are going to vote for a woman. It's really that simple.

  That is true for a significant number of women, just as it was for blacks in 2008 and 2012. Although most of them would blindly vote Dem, anyway.
  
  And this is why the left has been so protective of her, not just because of the historic opportunity of being the first woman POTUS, but the Clintons in general. The Clintons are extremely important to the Democratic party - who else do they have other than Elizabeth Warren and Obama?
  
  Fortunately for the left they'll be able to shower the Obama's with riches and build them up into something far better and more successful than they were (like they did with Slick Willy). 30 years from now, Obama probably WILL have had a great economy, and lowered the sea levels and reduced the deficit - none of that true, of course, but repeated enough that many will believe it.
• majorspark

  

  QuakerOats;1778965 wrote:"Some emails too damaging to release, under any circumstances ...."

  Hillary disagrees. She wants them released to the public. Nothing was "marked" (key word) classified. This is just an interagency dispute and not the consensus of the federal government. George Stephanopoulos should have asked her what other agencies of the federal government dispute the State Departments conclusion.
  
  Hillary stated she was "told" (key word) that a portion of these particular emails contained a published newspaper report. So to her it makes no sense as to why now they would totally be too sensitive to be made public. George Stephanopoulos should have asked her since it has already been made public if she was willing disclose the report she was referring to.
  
  The "key words" I picked up like flashing neon signs were chosen for plausible deniability purposes. Also the idea propagated that this whole thing is the result of political forces. Timely "leaks" are thrown out against an official statement of the State Department. Which as a branch of the executive is under the influence of the Democrat party. Leaks are one thing but official statements are another.
  
  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/01/31/hillary_clinton_to_stephanopoulos_email_investigation_very_much_like_benghazi_gop_grasping_at_straws.html
• SportsAndLady

  

  majorspark;1779175 wrote:Hillary disagrees. She wants them released to the public. Nothing was "marked" (key word) classified. This is just an interagency dispute and not the consensus of the federal government. George Stephanopoulos should have asked her what other agencies of the federal government dispute the State Departments conclusion.
  
  Hillary stated she was "told" (key word) that a portion of these particular emails contained a published newspaper report. So to her it makes no sense as to why now they would totally be too sensitive to be made public. George Stephanopoulos should have asked her since it has already been made public if she was willing disclose the report she was referring to.
  
  The "key words" I picked up like flashing neon signs were chosen for plausible deniability purposes. Also the idea propagated that this whole thing is the result of political forces. Timely "leaks" are thrown out against an official statement of the State Department. Which as a branch of the executive is under the influence of the Democrat party. Leaks are one thing but official statements are another.
  
  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/01/31/hillary_clinton_to_stephanopoulos_email_investigation_very_much_like_benghazi_gop_grasping_at_straws.html

  I was watching that interview live...every fucking thing she said was just lies and bullshit. Listening to her talk even for 5 min just makes my skin crawl. The fact that she is about to become our next president is mind boggling.
• gut

  majorspark;1779175 wrote:Hillary disagrees. She wants them released to the public.

  And don't forget that's not her call - so it can look like a declarative statement of innocence when, in fact, it is completely meaningless/irrelevant.
• Spock

  

  the only reason why Obamas AG has not arrested her yet is because she has dirt on him. He does not want a Clinton in the WH cause they will end up getting credit for anything that may be successful from his terms.
  
  HC has something on him so he kept Biden out of the race and wont put her in prison.
• majorspark

  

  gut;1779177 wrote:And don't forget that's not her call - so it can look like a declarative statement of innocence when, in fact, it is completely meaningless/irrelevant.

  And can be said with full confidence knowing they never will be released in her lifetime given the sensitivity of the information she knows is on them.
• Belly35

  

  How many acts of Treason can Hillary get away with?
• QuakerOats

  gut;1779177 wrote:And don't forget that's not her call - so it can look like a declarative statement of innocence when, in fact, it is completely meaningless/irrelevant.

  
  Just like in the '90's when she or Bill would get questioned about certain potential illegalities:
  
  Question: 'did you do X?'
  Answer: 'there is no evidence to support that.'
  
  Conclusion:
  
  A - you did not answer the question.
  B - obviously there is no evidence, you destroyed all of it.
  
  
  Yet time and time again they would skate by with that same answer ........"there is no evidence to support that claim". And the dumb asses posing as journalists never saw through it.
• rrfan

  

  Belly35;1779148 wrote:i have more faith in women then to think women will be so narrow minded to just vote gender. Voting race didn't work great.

  Amen!
• QuakerOats

  Highly classified Hillary Clinton emails that the intelligence community and State Department recently deemed too damaging to national security to release contain “operational intelligence” – and their presence on the unsecure, personal email system jeopardized “sources, methods and lives,” a U.S. government official who has reviewed the documents told Fox News.
  
  The official, who was not authorized to speak on the record and was limited in discussing the contents because of their highly classified nature, was referring to the 22 “TOP SECRET” emails that the State Department announced Friday it could not release in any form, even with entire sections redacted.
  
  The announcement fueled criticism of Clinton’s handling of highly sensitive information while secretary of state, even as the Clinton campaign continued to downplay the matter as the product of an interagency dispute over classification. But the U.S. government official’s description provides confirmation that the emails contained closely held government secrets. “Operational intelligence” can be real-time information about intelligence collection, sources and the movement of assets.
  The official emphasized that the “TOP SECRET” documents were sent over an extended period of time -- from shortly after the server's 2009 installation until early 2013 when Clinton stepped down as secretary of state.
  
  Separately, Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., who sits on the House intelligence committee, said the former secretary of state, senator, and Yale-trained lawyer had to know what she was dealing with.
  "There is no way that someone, a senior government official who has been handling classified information for a good chunk of their adult life, could not have known that this information ought to be classified, whether it was marked or not,” he said. "Anyone with the capacity to read and an understanding of American national security, an 8th grade reading level or above, would understand that the release of this information or the potential breach of a non-secure system presented risk to American national security."
  
  Pompeo also suggested the military and intelligence communities have had to change operations, because the Clinton server could have been compromised by a third party.