Tagged: right wing hypocrisy
March 10, 2015 at 1:36 pm #7935
This is like the birther mess. If you are looking to not trust, you won’t trust.
Those who are skeptics will evaluate it all and come to their own realizations.
If it really matters, there is enough communication records to sort it all out.
Remember, those emails also were stnt to and were sent by others.
If she really did attempt to hide something of importance, she would also have to get that done on all records and for all involved.
She knows this and acted accordingly.March 10, 2015 at 1:44 pm #7937
I still have to chuckle over this, of all the things that Clinton — in fact, Ron Fournier, who has I think written now five or six pieces on this, I don’t know if he’s got guilt or what have you, but he had a piece on Sunday. He said, you know, this e-mail stuff, this is not even really what this is about. This is about pay for play. This is about all of the money the Clinton Foundation is raising from dubious characters, pimps, purse snatchers, muggers, you know, world leaders all over the place.
That’s the real scandal here, who’s donating and what are they expecting for the money. I mean, she’s sitting secretary of state, and they’re donating all of this money, and it’s private, and everybody assumes that she’s gonna be president. What do these people expect for their money? That was his primary focus.March 10, 2015 at 1:46 pm #7938Alfredo_TParticipant
I get the overwhelming sense that for you, Jerry, it is very important to see validation that something nefarious has happened. It is an ideological necessity.
There are a few things that set off my bunk-o-meter:
1) If she had given her clintonemail.com address to anybody in high levels of the US government as a means for conducting classified business, I expect that she would have been required to get a State Department .gov e-mail address.
2) If she had sent an e-mail of a classified nature to anybody from the clintonemail.com address, I expect that the creation of an official State Department e-mail address would have been demanded.
3) I expect that it is drilled into employees’ heads at the State Department that security is paramount. I would expect them to be somewhat paranoid. I am skeptical that they would have blindly accepted any claims about the security of Clinton’s server. (I ask myself, if Clinton had wanted to use a yahoo.com e-mail address for government business, how many State Department people would have e-mailed her there?)March 10, 2015 at 1:46 pm #7939
The problem is that SHE is the one in charge of the delete button. She should have turned EVERYTHING over to be sorted through.March 10, 2015 at 1:55 pm #7940VitalogyParticipant
I think it’s Hillaryious that the shit throwing from the right is already in full swing with Hillary. This goes to show just how afraid the right is.
Tell you what: Worry about your fellow pedo priests before you worry about somebody’s emails.
Complete non-issue.March 10, 2015 at 2:13 pm #7941
This has sleeze written all over it. She’s doing the old “it depends what the definition of ‘is’ is” routine. She has total control over what should have been the property of the public. I don’t see why the right should fear her because she’s just proven herself to be very stupid, besides sneaky. Besides that, she’s so boring. W’s stuttering and stammering is like a symphony compared to her droning.
This isn’t a “right wing conspiricy.” She’ll try to blame others, but it’s not going to stick. I don’t think Democrats are going to rally around her this time.
And dude, I know you hate Catholics, but that’s irrelevant to this topic.
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Disclose everything. This whole scandal is about non-disclosure. It’s about hiding e-mails. It’s about having your own server so you have your own lawyers protecting it. It’s about having this money flow in from the outside world while she is secretary of state and now knowing that she might be the president which obviously is a kind of corruption. And yet I sort of admire Bill. He has the traditional, in his own life, this characteristic chutzpah where just say, ‘Yeah, I did it. It’s perfectly okay.’
Look, I think the damage here, it could be horrible if there is actually stuff in the e-mails. But imagine that there isn’t any. The damage is already done precisely because it revives the memories of the Clintons in the ’90s especially with Saturday Night Live with a young audience telling them for the first time that this is who the Clintons are.
Anybody who remembers the ’90s knows how they parsed and they skimmed and they reinterpreted words. It could be that it was illegal, what you did, it could be that it wasn’t or that it was skirting the rules or it wasn’t. But the point is that it raises the question, do you want to have this baggage around for the next four years or eight years? And that’s where I think the damage is done reminding people of how they conducted themselves in the past and telling them in that sense they are utterly incorrigible.March 10, 2015 at 2:29 pm #7943
First question at Hillary’s “press conference”:
“If you were a man today, would all this fuss be being made?” he asked.
(Same old Clintons).March 10, 2015 at 4:38 pm #7945
We have everything we need to understand how inclusive this all is.
Now, in the case of that secret bribe, why not join us in the call for transparency and accountability in campaign donations and what super PAC type groups do?
That would put the matter to rest across the board, and would remove most of the need to even ask these kinds of questions.
Primary opposition to transparency and accountability comes from Republicans.
Why is that?March 10, 2015 at 8:10 pm #7950Listener_PeteParticipantMarch 10, 2015 at 8:45 pm #7951
No, I didn’t know that it was known for two years. Regardless, there is no reason for her to be evasive if she has nothing to hide. We should not have to take her word for it that there is nothing classified on her hard drive or that the only emails being held back are personal.
Why didn’t she offer up the hard drive?March 10, 2015 at 10:44 pm #7953HerbSpectatorMarch 10, 2015 at 11:46 pm #7954Andy BrownParticipant
Go back to sleep, Herb. You haven’t missed anything. This is just . . . well, I already explained it.March 10, 2015 at 11:51 pm #7955skepticalParticipant
Despite a constant barrage of GOP made-up crap aimed her way since 1992, Hillary served as First Lady, a U.S. Senator, a presidential candidate, and Secretary of State. Clearly, the GOP tactics to keep the smartest Democrat politician at bay has not worked.
The Republicans are so fixed on smearing Hillary, they’ve forgotten to field a candidate that can ACTUALLY WIN AN ELECTION in the event Hillary declines to run!
And that calls for a round of laughter:March 11, 2015 at 12:17 am #7956
First, because it’s probably part of an array of hard drives, and it’s not so easy to pull one.
Second, even if it is easy, it’s her hard drive and the request for information doesn’t cover her entire disk, it covers e-mails related to her duties as Secretary of State.
She supplied those.
If we find she didn’t supply enough, then it’s another discussion.
Again, her communications are also recorded on a number of channels. If something is left out, there is extremely likely to be a gap in comms somewhere else highlighting this fact and she knows it.
Get back to us when there is some material evidence suggesting she’s actually done something nefarious.March 11, 2015 at 12:35 am #7958Andy BrownParticipant
missing, take some advice direct from Joe:
You can’t argue with a sick mind.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.