Hillary Clinton is Done

[Dr. Keith]

The whole thing is a game of gotcha. There was no answer that wouldn't have made her look bad. I wouldn't release them either.

I find that when I am in a "damned if I do, damned if I don't" position it is often due to my own error.

Do you think she bears any responsibility for having to answer this awkward no-win question? Do you think she handled it well?

 

[varwoche]

I find that when I am in a "damned if I do, damned if I don't" position it is often due to my own error.

Do you think she bears any responsibility for having to answer this awkward no-win question?

Perhaps, from an optics perspective. If she knew at the time that she might run, it was a bad idea to take the fees.

Do you think she handled it well?

When asked the question? Not particularly, though I'm not sure what she might have said different.

In my view, her biggest "crime" in this mini drama is the inane pretense that companies don't expect quid pro quo, even if that just means access. What a pile of unadulterated BS.

 

[mgidm86]

I don't think the Sanders campaign is asking for that (hell, he even told everyone how sick he was of her emails being in the news).

This one has been bugging me ever since that debate. In my view, he told her that he was sick and tired of hearing about her emails. It seems most people didn't take it this way (and that he himself perhaps didn't mean it this way), but to me he was telling her what an embarrassment it is and that she should do something about it.

If you tell someone you're sick and tired of hearing what an idiot they are, you aren't taking away the fact that the person is still an idiot.

 

[The_Animus]

This one has been bugging me ever since that debate. In my view, he told her that he was sick and tired of hearing about her emails. It seems most people didn't take it this way (and that he himself perhaps didn't mean it this way), but to me he was telling her what an embarrassment it is and that she should do something about it.

If you tell someone you're sick and tired of hearing what an idiot they are, you aren't taking away the fact that the person is still an idiot.

I watched that debate and as I understood it he was saying the constant media attention about what at the time seemed like another manufactured scandal was silly and distracted from real issues.

Now it seems like there may have been wrongdoing or at least negligence/incompetence regarding the e-mail server and I could see it now being a more legitimate issue.

 

[The Big Dog]

I watched that debate and as I understood it he was saying the constant media attention about what at the time seemed like another manufactured scandal was silly and distracted from real issues.

Now it seems like there may have been wrongdoing or at least negligence/incompetence regarding the e-mail server and I could see it now being a more legitimate issue.

and today a judge agreed with you and ordered discovery on it.

Which is very significant.

 

[Foolmewunz]

FUD

And what do people really think she will have said that will be so terrible for her election prospects?

It's a typical HDS sufferer make-work program. Creeping socialism, and all that. The HDS sufferers' chief support comes from the Amalgamated Cherry Pickers and Quote Miners Union. Give them forty pages of her speeches and they can put seven union members to work for a week.

 

[BenBurch]

and today a judge agreed with you and ordered discovery on it.

Which is very significant.

Link please, sir?

 

[BenBurch]

Link please, sir?

Never Mind! Found it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...27412a-d997-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_story.html

The judge was appointed by Bill Clinton to his current post...

 

[Mike!]

Never Mind! Found it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...27412a-d997-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_story.html

The judge was appointed by Bill Clinton to his current post...

Clearly a right wing stooge working for the epically huge, seriously, you wouldn't believe how big it is, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy^TM that's devoted every resource available at it's disposal to completely destroy poor, poor St. Hillary, who's only, no, soul purpose on this Earth, is to help lead all mankind humanity to a better life, with no regard for personal gain, whatsoever.

 

[BenBurch]

Clearly a right wing stooge working for the epically huge, seriously, you wouldn't believe how big it is, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy^TM that's devoted every resource available at it's disposal to completely destroy poor, poor St. Hillary, who's only, no, soul purpose on this Earth, is to help lead all mankind humanity to a better life, with no regard for personal gain, whatsoever.

That sums it up.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Clearly a right wing stooge working for the epically huge, seriously, you wouldn't believe how big it is, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy^TM that's devoted every resource available at it's disposal to completely destroy poor, poor St. Hillary, who's only, no, soul purpose on this Earth, is to help lead all mankind humanity to a better life, with no regard for personal gain, whatsoever.

Pretty much, yeah.

The lawsuit was brought by the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, which for years has sought records related to the State Department employment of one of Clinton’s top aides, Huma Abedin.

And even though the judge thought there might be evidence the private server was intended to skirt transparency laws:

Judicial Watch’s complaint that Clinton and Abedin "self-selected" their work emails “ignores the fact that federal employees routinely manage their email and ‘self-select’ their work-related messages when they, quite permissibly, designate and delete personal emails from their government email accounts,” the [state department lawyers argued].

Double standard, obsessive right wing pursuit of the Clintons.

 

[The Big Dog]

Pretty much, yeah.


And even though the judge thought there might be evidence the private server was intended to skirt transparency laws:

Double standard, obsessive right wing pursuit of the Clintons.

Oh the Clinton campaign has weighed in again.

the [state department lawyers argued].

Oh the lawyers argued that, and the Clinton appointed Judge rejected those arguments.

Double Standard, indeed.

ETA: Clinton Campaign Talking points almost verbatim on my iSkep?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/mook-...ail-woes/article/2001222#.VszqMpa1DrE.twitter

 

[The Big Dog]

Those Goldman Sachs Speeches Must have Been really bad

Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Must Be Really Bad

So: Will you agree to release these transcripts? They have become an issue.

Clinton: Sure, if everybody does it, and that includes the Republicans, because we know they have made a lot of speeches.

What transparent nonsense, she is refusing to release her transcripts even though Sanders did so. Now she is using the Republicans as an excuse. Seriously.

This logic is absurd. The reason there’s a different standard for Clinton is that she is the only candidate in this race who, after personally accepting millions of dollars from Wall Street banks, decided to run for President on a platform of regulating those banks. Her sustained evasion last night is particularly ridiculous because, two days after her ABC News interview, the public learned that, during a 2013 speech to Goldman Sachs, Clinton reportedly acted and spoke like a Goldman executive hoping to rally the banks’ rank-and-file for another profitable quarter. One attendee told Politico, “In this environment, it could be made to look really bad.”

She takes $650,000 cash money and then complains that people are holding her to a double standard. Oy vey, it doesn't get any more hypocritical than that.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Must Be Really Bad



What transparent nonsense, she is refusing to release her transcripts even though Sanders did so. Now she is using the Republicans as an excuse. Seriously.



She takes $650,000 cash money and then complains that people are holding her to a double standard. Oy vey, it doesn't get any more hypocritical than that.

GAWKER has some fine logic:

It’s become increasingly clear that the content of these speeches are, in fact, highly damaging to Clinton’s self-rendered image as a tough Wall Street regulator. What else could explain her repeated refusals to release them to the public?

 

[The Big Dog]

GAWKER has some fine logic:

It’s become increasingly clear that the content of these speeches are, in fact, highly damaging to Clinton’s self-rendered image as a tough Wall Street regulator. What else could explain her repeated refusals to release them to the public?

did you mean to make a point?

 

[The Big Dog]

@HillaryClinton believes Republicans should set the standard for disclosure of her Wall Street speeches. Aren't we better than that?

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 24, 2016

The fact that Hillary supporters are utterly incurious about what she was taking $650k for from Goldman Sachs is very telling.

 

[wareyin]

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 24, 2016

The fact that Hillary supporters are utterly incurious about what she was taking $650k for from Goldman Sachs is very telling.

A Republican posting about Sanders talking about Republicans setting the standard...are we in an Escher drawing?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

did you mean to make a point?

only to people who don't care for fallacies.

 

[sunmaster14]

only to people who don't care for fallacies.

You might be able to prove it's a fallacy by providing an answer to the question you highlighted. Otherwise, you are propagating a fallacy. If no reasonable answer to the question is forthcoming, then the proposition strikes me as sound.

 

[wareyin]

You might be able to prove it's a fallacy by providing an answer to the question you highlighted. Otherwise, you are propagating a fallacy. If no reasonable answer to the question is forthcoming, then the proposition strikes me as sound.

theprestige already has, in post 3251.

Eta:The Don also did in post 3239. I'm sure there are others I've missed.