Author Topic: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history  (Read 634600 times)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1000 on: March 06, 2016, 03:28:41 PM »
Doug,

"The Republican primaries turned out to be a circular firing squad, dividing and destroying the right while chasing away the undecideds and the persuadable."

I don't understand why we have to have debates week after week like this.

A field of 18 to start instead of being a plus turned into a disaster.

And too many debates every week.  All they do is turn the whole damn thing into a circus and make money for the media.

There has to be a better way.

"People are smart enough to distrust Hillary, and then vote for her anyway,"

It is amazing how the Democrats always seem to stick  together in the end.  Like Spartans. 
 

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1001 on: March 06, 2016, 03:39:20 PM »
Well, the Spartans did enslave others to support their lifestyles...

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1002 on: March 06, 2016, 08:39:22 PM »
"There has to be a better way."

There have to be better people.  Others responded in kind, but Donald is who brought this down, single-handedly.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1003 on: March 07, 2016, 04:23:03 AM »
Doug writes,

"Others responded in kind, but Donald is who brought this down, single-handedl"

Yes and no.  He obviously has the help of 25 to 40% of the Republican vote.  Why?  Because the Republican Party has ignored them for many years.

That responsibility rests squarely with the party people.  As for immigration,  Trump is right that we would not even be talking about it if not for him.

And he is right about China laughing at us.

But that may be about it.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1004 on: March 07, 2016, 06:54:41 AM »
"As for immigration,  Trump is right that we would not even be talking about it if not for him."

Certainly he brought spotlight to the issue, but as Cruz says, he was donating to 5 of the Gang of Eight when they were looking to pass Amnesty while Cruz was fighting it.

Also, Cruz has no "off the record" tapes with Pravda on the Hudson that he is refusing to allow to be released.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1005 on: March 07, 2016, 07:02:58 AM »
Just to help out the press, someone should write an AI program that automatically pushes the spin/diversion talking point of the day for the latest Clinton criminal conduct.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1007 on: March 07, 2016, 12:11:48 PM »
 8-) 8-) 8-)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
2009
June 23 email — Blumenthal forwarded Clinton a nearly entirely redacted email with subject line “N. Ireland/Shaun,” an apparent reference to Shaun Woodward, who then served as Northern Ireland’s secretary of state.

July 15 memo — Blumenthal refers to information from William Drozdiak, who at the time was the president of the American Council on Germany. The non-redacted portion of the email refers to the “disastrous nature” of an Obama diplomatic trip.


Sept. 23 email — Entitled “URGENT FOR NORTHERN IRELAND MEETINGS TOMORROW,” the Blumenthal memo refers to a Clinton Global Initiative event held days before to discuss ways to increase foreign investment in Northern Ireland.

Oct. 8 memo — Blumenthal provided an update on developments in Northern Ireland.

Oct. 11 memo — Blumenthal advised Clinton ahead of a speech she was set to give at Stormont Castle in Belfast in support of devolution, or the shifting of power from the U.K. parliament to the Northern Ireland national assembly.

Oct. 20 memo — Blumenthal shared an email from Northern Ireland’s Sec. of State Shaun Woodward. Clinton was set to meet with UK Shadow Foreign Minister William Hague. “This makes your meeting with Hague unexpectedly pressing,” Blumenthal wrote of Woodward’s email.

Nov. 28 memo — Blumenthal sent yet another update about negotiations in Northern Ireland.

2010

Blumenthal sent Clinton more updates on negotiations in Northern Ireland, including a Jan. 25 memo, a Jan. 27 memo, a March 4 memo, a March 6 memo, and a March 8 memo.

April 8 memo — Blumenthal forwarded Clinton an email from a source discussing internal politics in Kyrgyzstan, which was then in the midst of a revolution.

April 23 “Secret” memo — Blumenthal updated Clinton on the situation in Kyrgyzstan. The portion of the memo redacted for “secret” classified information discussed a criminal investigation.

2011

March 5 memo — Blumenthal forwarded Clinton an email from his longtime associate Cody Shearer, who has worked on behalf of the Clintons over the years. The memo, sent in the early days of the Libyan revolt, discussed the formation of the National Transitional Council, which replaced Muammar Gaddafi’s dictatorship.

March 18 memo — Blumenthal discussed Gaddafi’s response to the UN’s decision to authorize the use of force in Libya.

June 20 memo — Blumenthal’s memo, with the subject line “Bahrain, Iranian intelligence,” is completely redacted.

Oct. 12 memo —  A memo entitled “Saudi Arabia/Iran/Turkey” relied on Blumenthal’s “Sources with access to the highest levels of the Government of Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, as well as regional and Western Intelligence services.”

2012

May 30 memo — Blumenthal sent Clinton two memos containing information on German policy on the Eurozone crisis, which had reached full steam at that point. The information in the memos was passed to Blumenthal by sources who had conversations with German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schauble.

In the memo, Blumenthal cautioned Clinton that the information came from “an extremely sensitive source” and “should be handled with care.” He also insisted that the information must not be shared “with anyone associated with the German government.

June 27 memo — A memo entitled “Internal pressures and potential schisms in German government over Euro-zone” is entirely redacted.

July 14 memo — Blumenthal’s memo entitled “Egypt internal politics” came from “sources with access to the highest levels of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, and Western Intelligence and security services.”

Blumenthal characterized the sources as “extremely sensitive” and cautioned that the information should be “handled with care.”

Aug. 3 memo — Blumenthal passed along a memo discussing European Central Bank president Mario Draghi and negotitions with Germany to resolve the Eurozone debt crisis. The memo is entirely redacted as classified and is b ased on “sources with access to the highest levels of the Governments and institutions.”

Sept. 4 memo — Blumenthal passed along another now-entirely redacted memo based on “high-level sources.” The subject matter of the memo is not clear.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/07/here-are-the-23-classified-memos-sidney-blumenthal-sent-to-hillary-clinton/#ixzz42KvnGm8N

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
twisted logic to protect yer gal
« Reply #1009 on: March 09, 2016, 06:49:21 AM »
Twisted logic also called Clintonisms.   I say don't beother with distortions, denials, and cover ups.  If the left is not going to enforce the law then just say so.  Spare us the crap:

******Investors Business Daily POLITICS

ON THE LEFT

*Here’s Why Hillary Clinton Is Unlikely To Be Indicted*
(AP)
(AP)
RUTH MARCUS 3/08/2016 3:39 PM EST

Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)
Reprints
For those of you salivating — or trembling — at the thought of Hillary Clinton being clapped in handcuffs as she prepares to deliver her acceptance speech this summer: deep, cleansing breath. Based on the available facts and the relevant precedents, criminal prosecution of Clinton for mishandling classified information in her emails is extraordinarily unlikely.

My exasperation with Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state is long-standing and unabated. Lucky for her, political idiocy is not criminal.

“There are plenty of unattractive facts but not a lot of clear evidence of criminality, and we tend to forget the distinction,” American University law professor Stephen Vladeck, an expert on prosecutions involving classified information, told me. “This is really just a political firestorm, not a criminal case.”

Could a clever law student fit the fact pattern into a criminal violation? Sure. Would a responsible federal prosecutor pursue it? Hardly — absent new evidence, based on my conversations with experts in such prosecutions.

There are two main statutory hooks. Title 18, Section 1924, a misdemeanor, makes it a crime for a government employee to “knowingly remove” classified information “without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.”

Prosecutors used this provision in securing a guilty plea from former CIA Director David Petraeus, who was sentenced to probation and fined $100,000. But there are key differences between Petraeus and Clinton.

Petraeus clearly knew that the material he provided to Paula Broadwell was classified and that she was not authorized to view it. “Highly classified … code word stuff in there,” he told her. He lied to FBI agents, the kind of behavior that tends to inflame prosecutors.

In Clinton’s case, by contrast, there is no clear evidence that Clinton knew (or even should have known) that the material in her emails was classified. Second, it is debatable whether her use of the private server constituted removal or retention of material. Finally, the aggravating circumstance of false statements to federal agents is, as far as we know, absent.

The government used the same statute in 2005 against former national security adviser Sandy Berger, sentenced to probation and fined $50,000. Here, too, the conduct was more evidently egregious than the public record shows about Clinton’s. Berger, at the National Archives preparing for the 9/11 investigations, twice took copies of a classified report out of the building, hiding the documents in his clothes.

For Clinton, the worst public fact involves a 2011 email exchange with aide Jake Sullivan. When she has trouble receiving a secure fax, Clinton instructs Sullivan to “turn (it) into nonpaper (with) no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” But Clinton has said that she was not asking for classified information. In any event, it does not appear that anyone followed her instructions.

Another possible prosecutorial avenue involves the Espionage Act. Section 793(d) makes it a felony for a person entrusted with “information relating to the national defense” who “willfully communicates, delivers (or) transmits” it to an unauthorized person. That might be a stretch given the “willfully” requirement.

Section 793(f) covers a person with access to “national defense information” who through “gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust.” The government has used the “gross negligence” provision to prosecute a Marine sergeant who accidentally put classified documents in his gym bag and then hid them in his garage rather than return them, and an Air Force sergeant who put classified material in a dumpster so he could get home early.

The argument here would be that Clinton engaged in such “gross negligence” by transferring information she knew or should have known was classified from its “proper place” onto her private server, or by sharing it with someone not authorized to receive it.  Yet, as the Supreme Court has said, “gross negligence” is a “nebulous” term. Especially in the criminal context, it would seem to require conduct more like throwing classified materials into a dumpster than putting them on a private server that presumably had security protections.

My point here isn’t to praise Clinton’s conduct. She shouldn’t have been using the private server for official business in the first place. It’s certainly possible that she was cavalier about discussing classified material on it; that would be disturbing, but she wouldn’t be alone, especially given rampant overclassification.

The handling of the emails is an entirely legitimate subject for FBI investigation. That’s a far cry from an indictable offense.*****

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1010 on: March 09, 2016, 08:42:03 AM »
So glad to see we are getting pissed on and told that it's raining.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
she is so brave and so clever, is she not?
« Reply #1011 on: March 09, 2016, 02:14:08 PM »
What a stalwart in the world. Iran problem -> knee jerk -> "sanctions"!  (You mean the ones Brock just lifted?)

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-missiles-idUSKCN0WB0I9



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1014 on: March 16, 2016, 02:25:37 PM »
Switching over to the Dems and Hillary's security breach investigation...

a) She is guilty.  The test is gross negligence and she did it. What the FBI and the DOJ say is another matter.

b) The precedent is David Petreous.  The analogy fails; what she did is far worse.  He leaked to just one person.  Petreus' biographer had security clearance but not at that level.  They both broke the law and the rules.  Petreous received leniency - a fine and probation for his lapse and leak. 

c) The timing of this favors having Hillary putting it behind her now.  Assuming political forces play a part and they always do, having this aired out while she is winning the nomination but still competing will help inoculate her against the same bad news later from Republicans.

d) Therefore, the FBI and DOJ will soon conclude its work and either excoriate her for carelessness that fails to rise to a criminal level, they could charge her underlings and not her, or more appropriately, charge her with a misdemeanor plea bargained down to the Petreus deal. 

e) Getting that outcome now would help her win the Presidency better than letting it fester longer.  She will put her spin on it and move on in the campaign, just as she is doing anyway.  And then it dies off as other issues rise.  A small scar is better for the campaign than the endless slow drip.

ccp is right.  She will run for President, win the nomination and win the general election - even if she promised that nothing classified was sent or received and it turns out thousands of classified messages were.  Did someone here doubt her?  (

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1015 on: March 16, 2016, 02:44:07 PM »
" The precedent is David Petreous.  The analogy fails; what she did is far worse"

Agreed but there will be no outrage in the media that it IS worse.  Secondly the "precedent" argument is also now set up to be used in a way that points out over and over again that he was essentially forgiven.  (A misdemeanor was it?)  That was no coincidence.  You can't tell me that was granted to him without legal system looking down the road to the too big to fail gal.

As for timing.  The longer this plays out the more that works in the Democrats favor.  At some point the Left will be ALL OVER the airwaves arguing that this is for the "people to decide".  Lets have the election and we will let the people decide.  Doesn't that have such a *nice sounding ring* to it?  How noble.  BS of course but I have a sense that is where this is going to wind up.

Doug,

This is a bet I never ever wanted to win.    :cry:
« Last Edit: March 16, 2016, 02:51:18 PM by ccp »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1017 on: March 17, 2016, 07:25:19 AM »
Hillary, the Empress Dowager of Chappaqua, on Twitter and two responses:

"It is absolutely unacceptable that the gun industry can't be held accountable when they (sic) endanger Americans."

"We going to hold car manufacturers responsible for drunk driving deaths now?"

"Do we hold the computer industry accountable when someone mishandles classified govt. intel on a private email server?"

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1018 on: March 17, 2016, 08:23:36 AM »
Hillary, the Empress Dowager of Chappaqua, on Twitter and two responses:

"It is absolutely unacceptable that the gun industry can't be held accountable when they (sic) endanger Americans."

"We going to hold car manufacturers responsible for drunk driving deaths now?"

"Do we hold the computer industry accountable when someone mishandles classified govt. intel on a private email server?"

 :-D Love the last one!

DDF

  • Guest
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1019 on: March 17, 2016, 12:24:44 PM »
Hillary, the Empress Dowager of Chappaqua, on Twitter and two responses:

"It is absolutely unacceptable that the gun industry can't be held accountable when they (sic) endanger Americans."

"We going to hold car manufacturers responsible for drunk driving deaths now?"

"Do we hold the computer industry accountable when someone mishandles classified govt. intel on a private email server?"

Everybody is just full of hilarious stuff today.... I've noticed Señorita Chappaaqua or however in the hell it's spelt certainly doesn't want to give up her palm assistant.... go figure. She'll probably need it when if she's president to allow someone else to kill more Americans by leaking classified information.

Wow.... my mood just changed typing that.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Hillary Clinton's crimes and political problems
« Reply #1022 on: March 21, 2016, 10:28:59 AM »
It's hard to keep up with the Hillary Crime Family update posts.  It is so ho-hum to say she has committed a felony or two, but I need to clear my spindle once in a while.

One small fact keeps her commodities trading from being a prosecutable felony, the statute of limitations.  All other facts indicate she is guilty and the crime was trading stolen money to enrich one side and buy political favors for the other.  Not a small deal for a politician.

The email fiasco is also most certainly a felony.  The undercharging of Hillary by an administration that supports her, right as she runs is a political favor corruption crime of its own, of the worst kind. 

Other stories:

CLASSIFIED EMAILS REVEAL HILLARY CLINTON WORKED WITH GOOGLE/YOUTUBE TO BLOCK BENGHAZI VIDEO(S)
http://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/blogs/news/93521217-emails-reveal-hillary-had-youtube-block-benghazi-videos
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0226/7001/files/Classified_Emails_Reveal_Hillary_Clinton_Worked_with_Google_YouTube_to_Block_Benghazi_Video_1024x1024.png?9685109793385273701
After the Benghazi attack Hillary's State Department emails show her administration was in contact with Google regarding a blocked YouTube video after President Obama admitted that the Benghazi attack was a preplanned act of terror.

Gaffe?  Already mentioned here, http://ktar.com/story/967243/hillary-clinton-us-has-done-a-really-good-job-securing-arizona-mexico-border/

http://freebeacon.com/politics/hillary-clintons-four-days-of-gaffes/

Black Dems aren't turning out for Hillary>
http://nypost.com/2016/03/18/black-dems-arent-turning-out-for-hillary-like-they-did-for-obama/
The number of African-Americans who voted in Tuesday’s primaries plummeted by an estimated 40 percent in Ohio, 38 percent in Florida and 34 percent in North Carolina compared with the 2008 Democratic primary when Barack Obama was on the ballot.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/03/18/four_stories_with_four_different_reasons_why_hillary_clinton_is_the_worst_democrat_nominee_in_history

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/us/politics/as-hillary-clinton-sweeps-states-one-group-resists-white-men.html?_r=0
While Mrs. Clinton swept the five major primaries on Tuesday, she lost white men in all of them, and by double-digit margins in Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, exit polls showed — a sharp turnabout from 2008, when she won double-digit victories among white male voters in all three states.

Huff Post, 10 reasons Hillary could fail:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/think-again-hillary-democ_b_9495560.html

Authenticity problems:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/report-obama-pushes-donors-to-back-hillary-despite-authenticity-problems/

Hillary has an NSA problem, not just an FBI problem.
http://observer.com/2016/03/hillary-has-an-nsa-problem/
[Blunethal's unsecured emails to Clinton ("keep them coming") "illegally lifted from four different NSA reports, all of them classified “Top Secret / Special Intelligence.” Worse, at least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program, or SAP, several of which from the CIA Ms. Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1023 on: March 21, 2016, 04:00:41 PM »
Republicans should start shifting the focus from

#1  Were crimes committed ?

to

#2  Will the Obama Justice Department do anything about it?

Hamlet says, that is the question.  Therefore the focus should be to plow as much public pressure onto World History's greatest human being [sic] to prove to  300 million Americans no one is above the law.

I am willing to allow conjugal visits between Hillary and Huma.


« Last Edit: March 21, 2016, 04:06:29 PM by ccp »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1024 on: March 21, 2016, 07:53:07 PM »
 :evil:

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
can anyone believe this
« Reply #1025 on: March 22, 2016, 04:21:42 PM »
Democrat lawyers are already dancing around the Clinton emails.  Bottom line the law simply does not apply to her:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/experts-clinton-unlikely-face-felony-161016100.html




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: WaPo: Hillary's numbers are worse than they appear,
« Reply #1029 on: March 23, 2016, 10:33:26 AM »
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/21/the-republican-race-serves-as-a-useful-distraction-from-how-bad-things-are-for-clinton/

All these defects in her character, record, candidacy and support are true, yet she is a 71% favorite right now to win the White House.  (source: CNN)

She succeeds in politics the way I did in sports; I attribute all of my success in sports to weak opponents. 

Some of us actively tried to put someone up against Hillary who could defeat her.  Others knew better.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1030 on: March 23, 2016, 04:10:56 PM »
"She succeeds in politics the way I did in sports; I attribute all of my success in sports to weak opponents."

Doug,  you didn't have a crooked mob of lying and corrupt pols, lawyers, media types and a hundred million bribed voters and (illegals to add to their overall mobster army) to get you over the finish line like she does.


Just read this excerpt from my previous link in my post above:

"The relatively few laws that govern the handling of classified materials were generally written to cover spies, leakers and those who illegally retain such information, such as at home. Though the view is not unanimous, several lawyers who specialize in this area said it’s a stretch to apply existing statutes to a former cabinet secretary whose communication of sensitive materials was with aides — not a national enemy."

This is from legal experts?   This is the most outrageous lie I have ever heard.  Legal experts who make this claim should be immediately disbarred.  The reason we have laws protecting the security privacy and integrity of communications in government, particularly at the State Department is to prevent any break in that integrity or chain of custody of information.  I worked as a contract worker at the CDC which is NOTHING important compared to her and yet it was made ABSOLUTELY clear that we were subject to felony charges if we messed with their IT network or exposed it to a security breech.  

If this were not the case with  her as well, then why did they have her sign a contract that explicitly says just that?  Answer , of course she is subject to criminal prosecution.

So for this to be said now is an outrageous fucking lie of the highest order.  Any lawyer who makes this argument should have their license revoked.

That would be like a doctor saying that HIPPA does not apply to him or her.  

What a damn joke.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2016, 04:20:36 PM by ccp »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1031 on: March 23, 2016, 05:10:42 PM »
Exactly so!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Hillbillary Clintons - put the "AWFUL legacy of the last 8 years" behind us
« Reply #1032 on: March 24, 2016, 07:03:20 PM »
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/21/bill-clinton-knocks-obamas-awful-legacy/82094792/

See Bill Clinton for yourself, short clip.  He sounds awful.

What the hell is he talking about?  Inadvertent truth?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1033 on: March 24, 2016, 07:13:49 PM »
Nothing new here but I only post this because this is coming from the Washington Post.  I would only ask is why is he not demanding she drop out of the race?

*****Deceit and power work in Hillary Clinton’s favor
Resize Text Print Article Comments 55 Book mark article  Read later list
 Saved to Reading List

By Ed Rogers March 23 
 
Hillary Clinton speaks during a rally at Rainier Beach High School in Seattle on Tuesday. (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
In politics, it is said that you can fool some of the people all of the time and you can fool all of the people some of the time. In other words, liars have pretty good odds. The smoking guns keep piling up at Hillary Clinton’s feet, but nothing seems to trip her. Yesterday, Judicial Watch released a batch of documents, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, that it says reveals blatant coordination between then-Secretary of State Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Stunningly, the internal State Department emails expose Clinton’s eagerness to “thank [Clinton Foundation] supporters for their commitments.” Of course, these “commitments” must mean money. It’s incredible.

And, Clinton’s State Department was apparently coordinating meetings for Bill Clinton with foreign heads of state. If any other employee at the State Department had arranged such meetings for their spouse and actively thanked contributors to their spouse’s foundation, they would likely go to jail. No lawyer would even let it go to trial, because the sentencing guidelines would guarantee years behind bars. Another way to think about what was going on is to imagine that another country’s foreign minister’s spouse or family ran a foundation that American companies were caught giving to. Those American companies would certainly be vulnerable to prosecution by the Justice Department under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

It’s only because Hillary’s last name is Clinton and because she is the Democratic front-runner for president that she isn’t already being prosecuted for something or another. For anyone else at the State Department, their conviction and sentencing would produce only a matter-of-fact, back-page reference in The Washington Post.

The double standard doesn’t end there. If any other State Department employee had decided to conduct all of his or her official business on a personal server located in his or her private home, that person would have already been prosecuted. Period. Full stop. And the story of that guilty plea would only have been prominent in the news because of the brazen gall displayed by the officeholder in question.

While it’s not all criminal, Clinton’s record of deceit has become something of an advantage for her campaign. One thing she can count on is that no one trusts her or believes what she says about her current policy positions. She rails against the big banks and the bankers she has always been cozy with, in part as a response to the popularity of Bernie Sanders’s message. But if you ask any bankers how they feel about Hillary Clinton as president, they will tell you they don’t fear a Hillary Clinton presidency. They will tell you that Hillary Clinton knows them and they know her. No one believes her White House would be hostile to the financial services industry. No one assumes she is telling the truth. They all know she is just saying what she has to say on the campaign trail in order to pacify the most gullible among the Democratic voters. The bankers and Wall Street types all count on the idea that whatever Clinton says in the campaign is irrelevant. They are all getting the message; they all see the wink, and they are happy to shrug off today’s rhetoric.


It’s the same thing with the free-trade advocates and the Keystone XL pipeline opponents. There is not one business executive who thinks a President Hillary Clinton would actually block the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade treaty. The anti-Keystone groups will rely more on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau than on Hillary Clinton’s newly minted assertions that the pipeline won’t get built.

Don’t just take it from me. Voters can sense her lack of authenticity and sincerity. In the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, 59 percent of voters said that Hillary Clinton is not honest and trustworthy. The only person who is viewed as being even less trustworthy is the Republican front-runner, Donald Trump. How is it that in a country of approximately 330 million people, there aren’t two well-adjusted, honorable people who are likely to end up being our choices to be president of the United States?

It’s all very discouraging. Election 2016 is taking American politics beyond a new low, entering us into a reality where deceit and deception are assumed.

Ed Rogers is a contributor to the PostPartisan blog, a political consultant and a veteran of the White House and several national campaigns. He is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group, which he founded with former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour in 1991.***

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
One of Bill's lovers says EDC is a lesbian
« Reply #1038 on: March 29, 2016, 04:10:09 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1039 on: March 30, 2016, 07:25:35 AM »
"Yes, this is just gossip."

OTOH everything she is claiming fits the profile to a tea.    
Even the part about Chelsea being conceived as a political calculation.   Would anyone doubt that this does sound just like everything we know about both of them?

Hillary certainly has some sort of personality disorder.  I don't know if it is psychopathic or narcissistic ?  There are at least features of each.  While it is true that there are a higher percentage of psychopaths in the prison vs the general population it is also true that the most are not murderers like in the slasher movies.  Her being on the wrong side of the law is characteristic.   Wish we had a psychiatrist on the board to give a better opinion.

Could we get Charles Krauthammer to comment?

« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 07:39:06 AM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1040 on: March 31, 2016, 04:18:06 PM »
This is so Classic of some form of personality disorder.  Everyone else lies and lies about her.  Just never her!

To think some one so sick can get this far.  Grifters:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/03/31/hillary-i-m-so-sick-of-bernie-lies.html

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1041 on: March 31, 2016, 09:48:24 PM »
An interesting indictment, logistic, campaign question came up today, where will they post the secret service protection in relation to her cell?   Will it affect her acceptance speech if she skypes it in wearing an orange jumpsuit?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1042 on: April 01, 2016, 05:08:15 AM »
"where will they post the secret service protection in relation to her cell?   Will it affect her acceptance speech if she skypes it in wearing an orange jumpsuit?"

One could imagine she will run her mafia organization from jail .  The SS will be used to smuggle out covert orders to her soldiers.  The Clinton Foundation will have her daughter run day to day operations under Chelsea, Bill will remain the "front man" and Hill will still call all the big shots from jail.  Just let the guards and SS in on the action.  That's all.

Now one can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.  But is there any Constitutional guidelines on a convicted felon from running for office.  They cannot vote but can they run for office?  President?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Cognitive Dissonance of Hillary Clinton, abortion, not ready for prime time
« Reply #1044 on: April 03, 2016, 12:48:43 PM »
Let's see who else picks up on this.  HRC on Meet the Press, I think it was, this morning screwed up for pro-choice worse than DT screwed up for pro-life.  I can add the transcript later.

Sec. Clinton kept referring to the pregnant woman deserving choice as a "mother carrying a child".  She also referred to "the unborn person".

Justice Breyer has also made this awful Orwellian, pro-choice mis-speak.  Why is a woman carrying a "fetus" a mother?  Mother of what?  The facts (in that case) didn't say she had previous children.

I did not know that it is an unborn "child" or "person" inside a pro-choice "mother".  I was called "unviable tissue mass" inside a "woman".  Important distinction!

This changes everything.  You terminate tissue.  You don't terminate a child.  Some might call that ......[murder].

Maybe Hillary had a Trump pro-life moment when a beautiful (to them) Clinton grandbaby popped out after 9 months of kicking inside the tummy of Hillary's loving (to her) daughter Chelsea.

Maybe Democrats are people too and are capable of putting life ahead of politics...  Or should I expect a correction.  She didn't mean to say mother and child - and Trump didn't mean to say punish the woman.

Unfortunately, we live in a time void of great leaders.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1045 on: April 04, 2016, 06:22:02 AM »
USA Today is not exactly a conservative publication.   One thing is for sure.  Bernie Sanders should go down in history as making the most stupid political blunder of all time letting the grifter off the hook.  No Bernie.  Most Americans do care about honesty. 


http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/04/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-legal-definition-national-defense-information-classification-column/82446130/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: Cognitive Dissonance of Hillary Clinton, abortion kills an "unborn person"
« Reply #1046 on: April 04, 2016, 09:04:29 AM »
Let's see who else picks up on this.  HRC on Meet the Press, I think it was, this morning screwed up for pro-choice worse than DT screwed up for pro-life.  I can add the transcript later.

Sec. Clinton kept referring to the pregnant woman deserving choice as a "mother carrying a child".  She also referred to "the unborn person".
...
I did not know that it is an unborn "child" or "person" inside a pro-choice "mother".  It was called "unviable tissue mass" inside a "woman".  Important distinction!

This changes everything.  You terminate tissue.  You don't terminate a child.  ...

Yes, this was noticed by others!  At least on the right...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/3/hillary-clinton-unborn-person-has-no-constitutiona/print/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3522101/Hillary-Clinton-says-unborn-person-doesn-t-constitutional-rights-explains-stance-abortion.html
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/04/03/hillary-clinton-unborn-person-doesnt-constitutional-rights/
http://www.lifenews.com/2016/04/03/hillary-clinton-on-abortion-the-unborn-person-doesnt-have-constitutional-rights/
http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/03/hillary-unborn-babies-do-not-have-rights-video/

Video Clip of the exchange:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/04/03/chuck_todd_to_hillary_clinton_when_or_if_does_an_unborn_child_have_constitutional_rights.html

Good for Chuck Todd for asking one tough, relevant question.  She usually doesn't go on shows that do that - I believe she has never appeared on Fox News Sunday.  Todd introduced the subject by ripping Trump for taking 5 positions in one week on abortion.  Hillary got her guard down, was ready to jump in and pile on, but instead he gave her an open ended opportunity to state her view on abortion.  She went right into Roe v Wade, that she agrees with it and so on, and it allows for some restrictions.  Then Todd bluntly asked her when and if an unborn child has constitutional rights.  And she stumbled badly. 

The left thrives off of owning the language of the issues.  Spending going up is a budget cut.  Temporary spending is permanent.  Affordable housing is not affordable but requires subsidy, hence a government policy.  Affordable healthcare, same thing, makes it unaffordable, requiring a massive federal program with mandates that all would not be needed if it was affordable as the term used to mean.  Eliminating racial differences means putting more focus on race.  Marriage is no longer husband-wife, and so on. The left owns the language when they are winning on issues, and they pull it off by having monopoly control of the messages around us, from k-12 curriculum, to teachers unions, colleges, elite universities and the media.

Nowhere is language more crucial than abortion.  Rachel meant well, especially on moral issues but would only post about abortion by starting a separate thread called 'reproductive issues'.  Abortion isn't reproduction; it's the opposite.  But you don't call it killing a baby and then ask people what they think about it.

Hillary has been so deeply entrenched in this kind of leftism that her blunder was outrageous.  ccp might know, but it could be a symptom of age or brain injury that such an expert on the topic would make such a beginner leftist type of error after all these years in the leftist bubble.  Otherwise she got sloppy after recently experiencing a real, grandmother-grandbaby love when she should have been reviewing Saul Alinsky manuals for her upcoming run.

You don't call 'it' a 'person' while talking about it having no rights, okay to kill.  You don't call the woman a mother and you don't call the fetus a child.  If you begin to admit, as Reagan put it, that it [a fetus] is 1) alive, 2) human, and 3) and has separate, distinct DNA from the mother (and father), then you are pro-life, not pro-choice.  Abortion becomes a killing of a child, not a procedure on a woman.

In the middle of the same sentence, she used proper leftist language, that it is the woman's "decision".  A sentence that ends without saying it is the woman's decision to do what, kill / end the life of the 'child', 'person', 'tissue mass', whatever you want to call what is alive and being killed and removed.

The science in this case is not on the side of the life deniers, so adhering to a very careful and strict choice of words is the only way to defend this barbaric, 21st century, 1st world practice that in 98% of the cases is done for convenience reasons.

Muslim genitalia mutilation at birth is abhorrent behavior to us, but killing the same baby one moment earlier isn't - only because of a strict choice of words and framing of the issue.
 

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72293
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1047 on: April 04, 2016, 09:56:31 AM »
Very good post.  Please put on the abortion thread as well.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1048 on: April 05, 2016, 08:31:04 AM »
Thank you, will do.  I would add that 'person' is a legal term and Hillary is hinting that she would like to guarantee government healthcare to the unborn - if not for the abortion interest.  I think she hit her head pretty hard on the fall...

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« Reply #1049 on: April 05, 2016, 08:46:18 AM »
Obviously from a Sanders supporter on Salon a vehemently anti- anything Republican and leftist news outlet:
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/05/this_is_how_the_fbi_destroys_hillary_the_10_questions_that_could_end_her_white_house_dreams/