Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob001 said:
It doesn't matter what you -- or she -- wants. She was acting as the representative of the United States in the world, and her official correspondence is a matter of public record. Government employment carries certain obligation.
Click to expand...

I'm sure her lawyers looked it over and made sure that she was meeting at least the minimum obligation.

As I said before, I haven't followed the case closely, so maybe there is something there. However, the things I have seen are all the sort of, "This law really means that since she was doing anything that might be interpreted this way, she obviously broke the law, and we ought to be outraged!" In other words, what little I've read is a bunch of people trying to stretch the law as far as possible so that it covers her just a little bit. Maybe something else will come out later, but as best I've read, she hasn't done anything that anyone else would be indicted for. Fired, maybe, but not indicted. And since she was the boss, there's really no one to fire her, except the President, and he didn't.

Once we get something tangible that doesn't require paragraphs of explanation to say why she broke the law, I'll buy into it. Right now, it looks like a witch hunt.

It's just a measure of the Clinton mindset -- and her isolation -- that she decided "I can keep everything secret in my basement and nobody will know!"
Click to expand...

Since she wasn't using a .gov address, I'm pretty sure everybody knew, and if they didn't, they're a bit behind the times. It's not like she kept this a secret.
 
Meadmaker said:
I'm sure her lawyers looked it over and made sure that she was meeting at least the minimum obligation.

As I said before, I haven't followed the case closely, so maybe there is something there. However, the things I have seen are all the sort of, "This law really means that since she was doing anything that might be interpreted this way, she obviously broke the law, and we ought to be outraged!" In other words, what little I've read is a bunch of people trying to stretch the law as far as possible so that it covers her just a little bit. Maybe something else will come out later, but as best I've read, she hasn't done anything that anyone else would be indicted for. Fired, maybe, but not indicted. And since she was the boss, there's really no one to fire her, except the President, and he didn't.

Once we get something tangible that doesn't require paragraphs of explanation to say why she broke the law, I'll buy into it. Right now, it looks like a witch hunt.

Since she wasn't using a .gov address, I'm pretty sure everybody knew, and if they didn't, they're a bit behind the times. It's not like she kept this a secret.
Click to expand...

a witch hunt? She is running for President...
 
Bob001 said:
It doesn't matter what you -- or she -- wants. She was acting as the representative of the United States in the world, and her official correspondence is a matter of public record. Government employment carries certain obligations. Many people don't even consider applying for government jobs because they don't want to submit to background checks or financial disclosures or conflict-of-interest restrictions. But someone who does want a government job accepts everything that goes with it. It's also significant that the President -- her boss -- knew nothing about her unique private arrangements until it was revealed during the Congressional investigation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-weighs-in-hillary-clinton-private-emails/

It's just incomprehensible that she didn't have multiple email accounts, like most ordinary people: the government one for official state dept. business, and private ones for her foundation, close family and friends, social media, etc. It's just a measure of the Clinton mindset -- and her isolation -- that she decided "I can keep everything secret in my basement and nobody will know!"
Click to expand...
Yawn.

What is it about 'it doesn't look like any laws were broken' that you don't understand?

I could just as easily say, "It doesn't matter what you want, it appears she was acting within the law."
 
Meadmaker said:
I'm sure her lawyers looked it over and made sure that she was meeting at least the minimum obligation.
.....
Click to expand...
That's actually a subject of dispute. It's clear that she violated established policies and practices, even if they weren't codified in the laws at that time (as they are now).
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/25/u...inspector-general-intelligence-community.html

Meadmaker said:
....
Since she wasn't using a .gov address, I'm pretty sure everybody knew, and if they didn't, they're a bit behind the times. It's not like she kept this a secret.
Click to expand...

Any particular person would only know that he was exchanging emails with her through an alternate account, not that she never had a government account or that she installed a private server in her basement. Even the President didn't know what she was doing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/u...-clinton-was-using-private-email-address.html
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...th-clinton-but-didnt-know-account-was-private
 
Bob001 said:
Once again, "She's not a convicted felon!" isn't the most compelling credential.

Here are some arguments against Hillary that go way beyond secret emails.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...16-has-never-made-sense-for-democrats/401597/
Click to expand...
A, that isn't all her credentials consist of. B, she has an incredible resumé compared to any of the contenders. And C, no one in the Clown Car is even a viable candidate except Kasich and Bush and neither of them are close to being nominated.
 
Bob001 said:
That's actually a subject of dispute. It's clear that she violated established policies and practices, even if they weren't codified in the laws at that time (as they are now).
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/25/u...inspector-general-intelligence-community.html
Any particular person would only know that he was exchanging emails with her through an alternate account, not that she never had a government account or that she installed a private server in her basement. Even the President didn't know what she was doing.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/u...-clinton-was-using-private-email-address.html
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...th-clinton-but-didnt-know-account-was-private
Click to expand...


"The president was referring specifically to the arrangement associated with Secretary Clinton's email," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday. "Yes, the president was aware of her email address; he traded emails with her. That shouldn't be a surprise, that the president of the United States is going to trade emails with the secretary of state.

"But the president was not aware of the fact that this was a personal email server...

Because, clearly the domain "clintonemail.com" is for the use of all the people named clinton in the world, not just HRC personally... :rolleyes:
 
TheL8Elvis said:
.....
Because, clearly the domain "clintonemail.com" is for the use of all the people named clinton in the world, not just HRC personally... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Her personal address was hdr22@clintonemail.com. If a user thought about it at all, they might imagine that the domain was shared by family members and their foundation. The point is that using that address wouldn't in itself alert anyone that she never had an official address, anymore than using gmail would tell anyone that the user doesn't have a work address.
 
Personally, I rarely look at the actual email address - I pull the name from the address book that has the email address associated with it. I think Obama used a secure blackberry a lot. When you pull up a name, it doesn't show the email address normally, IIRC.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
A, that isn't all her credentials consist of. B, she has an incredible resumé compared to any of the contenders.
....
Click to expand...

Resume, yes. What are her actual accomplishments as a one-and-a-third term Senator and Secretary of State? (Time as First Lady doesn't count, unless you consider Laura Bush, Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan viable candidates.)
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
Resume, yes. What are her actual accomplishments as a one-and-a-third term Senator and Secretary of State? (Time as First Lady doesn't count, unless you consider Laura Bush, Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan viable candidates.)
Click to expand...

Any particular reason why they wouldn't have been viable candidates?
 
plague311 said:
Any particular reason why they wouldn't have been viable candidates?
Click to expand...

I would say they fact that they never held or ran for any elective office and have no public records independent of their husbands would be fair considerations. At least Hillary Clinton won two Senate elections on her own.
 
Bob001 said:
Resume, yes. What are her actual accomplishments as a one-and-a-third term Senator and Secretary of State? (Time as First Lady doesn't count, unless you consider Laura Bush, Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan viable candidates.)
Click to expand...

Can't wait for the Slick Willamina Clown Car, to park and answer this!:D

:popcorn1:popcorn1:popcorn1
 
Bob001 said:
Her personal address was hdr22@clintonemail.com. If a user thought about it at all, they might imagine that the domain was shared by family members and their foundation. The point is that using that address wouldn't in itself alert anyone that she never had an official address, anymore than using gmail would tell anyone that the user doesn't have a work address.
Click to expand...

You are defending the fact that the president didn't know it "was a personal email server" by pointing out that it was a domain maybe shared by family members and their foundation. ? :confused:

What other kind of email server would that be ?

And ...if the president was conducting business with her not at an official address... shouldn't that raise his eyebrows ?

I guess I am just confused how you can overlook the President not thinking about it (if he thought about it all) , but you have a problem when HRC claims she didn't think about what kind of email system there would be ...
Bob001 said:
That actually illustrates how tone-deaf HC is. A politician doesn't get to decide for herself what's a "non-issue." That's pretty much like saying "it's none of your business." Her opponents and ultimately the voters decide what's an issue. I haven't heard her or anyone else say that she didn't use the federal government's email system when she served as U.S. senator for eight years. She can't realistically claim that she chose to do -- and pay for -- something different as secretary of state but didn't have time to "stop and think what kind of email system will there be."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
I would say they fact that they never held or ran for any elective office and have no public records independent of their husbands would be fair considerations. At least Hillary Clinton won two Senate elections on her own.
Click to expand...

You acknowledge her position as Secretary of State, that she won 2 Senate elections, as well as serving as First Lady and as a Governor's wife (is there a term for that? First Lady of Arkansas?). Clinton was obviously active during her husband's presidency, so that does add to her resume for me. What do her opponents have in the way of resume's, again?

Trump: no elected office, born rich
Bush: Daddy was Pres (eta: and so was his brother!), governed Florida for 2 terms during a housing bubble
Walker: 2 term Wisconsin governor
Rubio: A junior US Senator

None of these guys (except Rubio) have held a position on the National level, and none of them have any experience with foreign governments.
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
Resume, yes. What are her actual accomplishments as a one-and-a-third term Senator and Secretary of State? (Time as First Lady doesn't count, unless you consider Laura Bush, Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan viable candidates.)
Click to expand...
Hillary haters are blind to her accomplishments. It won't matter that I post this:
Here’s A List Of Hillary Clinton’s Accomplishments, So Quit Saying She Doesn’t Have Any

I posted a similar link upstream, it's been ignored as this one will be.

Even Fox News admits she has a list of accomplishments:
Eleven accomplishments Hillary Clinton should be touting on the campaign trail

Probably because they think this list of Progressive accomplishments is a bad thing.

RIGHT WING IGNORES HILLARY CLINTON’S ACHIEVEMENTS AS SENATOR

George Will Pretends Hillary Clinton Has No Achievements
Clinton's accomplishments during her years in the position. These include opening up Myanmar as the first secretary of state to make an official visit there since 1955, negotiating a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas with the help of Egypt in 2012, and tightening international sanctions on Iran to their highest level ever with nearly a dozen countries significantly reducing their purchases of Iranian oil in 2012.
Click to expand...

Her speech in China on women's rights was a very big deal.
HILLARY CLINTON, IN CHINA, DETAILS ABUSE OF WOMEN
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Hillary haters are blind to her accomplishments. It won't matter that I post this:
Here’s A List Of Hillary Clinton’s Accomplishments, So Quit Saying She Doesn’t Have Any

I posted a similar link upstream, it's been ignored as this one will be.

Even Fox News admits she has a list of accomplishments:
Eleven accomplishments Hillary Clinton should be touting on the campaign trail

Probably because they think this list of Progressive accomplishments is a bad thing.

RIGHT WING IGNORES HILLARY CLINTON’S ACHIEVEMENTS AS SENATOR

George Will Pretends Hillary Clinton Has No Achievements


Her speech in China on women's rights was a very big deal.
HILLARY CLINTON, IN CHINA, DETAILS ABUSE OF WOMEN
Click to expand...

So why isn't she touting these incredible accomplishments?
 
Lolz. It did not take long for Shillaries to throw Obama under the bus.

He should have KNOWN Hillary was a paranoid nut job.

Gee, I wonder why Joe Biden is thinking about running?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom