hillary Email

This topic contains 72 replies, has 16 voices, and was last updated by  NoParty 4 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 61 through 73 (of 73 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #8062

    Herb
    Participant

    Gawker’s John Cook: Clinton Claims Are “Insulting To The Intelligence Of The American People,” Her “Schemes” Are “Nixonian:”

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/03/13/gawkers_john_cook_clinton_is_nixonian_claims_insulting_to_the_intelligence_of_the_american_people.html

    #8063

    duxrule
    Participant

    But Nixon is your hero, isn’t he? That would mean that you actually admire people who are “Nixonian,” wouldn’t it?

    #8065

    jerry1949
    Spectator

    Would the Clinton apologists please explain why it is a bad idea that an independent arbiter go through her emails instead of her own attorneys?

    ————————-

    CLINTON (at UN presser): What did was to direct, you know, my counsel to conduct a thorough investigation … I, uh, am very, uh, confident of the process that we conducted. … I have, uh, no doubt that we’ve done exactly what we should have done.

    STEWART: And I have no doubt that you have no doubt. And maybe you did hand over everything you were supposed to. But when we all agree to do things a certain way, and you do it in a different way, it looks weird.

    – See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/2015/03/12/jon-stewart-aint-buying-hillarys-characteristic-email-dissembling#stha

    #8073

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    Because there has been no material cause shown to justify anything other than the disclosure she already provided.

    Clinton is under no obligation to placate witch hunters, anglers, clowns, dullards, morons, and their peers.

    #8076

    jerry1949
    Spectator

    Hillary is a Clinton which means she gets to make her own rules and the little people just have to trust her.

    She could placate the suspicious. Why not? That opens the door to more trust and more votes.

    She’s not allowing the public their right to see her emails “just because” she doesn’t think she has to. She’s obviously hiding something.

    I’m surprised to see you turn on John Stewart. He’s a dullard, witch hunter, etc. etc. etc.?

    #8077

    Amus
    Participant

    Remember the fishing expedition that resulted from the Whitewater fiasco?

    Remember that when all was said and done there was NO WRONG DOING?

    Why should she enable those bastards?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=122883

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/whitewater-case-closed/

    #8078

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    She could do that, and she could have made other email choices too.

    Doesn’t mean she has to, nor that it makes sense to do.

    As for different rules, get back to me when Republicans quit using one set for their people in office, and another when they are out.

    Cheney: deficits don’t matter

    (Which he is largely right about)

    Republicans with Obama, Clinton, Dems in office: Oh god, look at the spending!

    There are a ton of examples.

    Honestly, this argument looks a lot like you calling for better rules when you look too much the ass to feel good about.

    Get over it.

    Show some material cause, or get bent. That is exactly what Clinton is saying, as she should at this point.

    #8079

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    Amus has it right.

    If there was some genuine good intent here, expectations would be much different.

    As for Stewart, it is no surprise you really don’t understand his commentary nor the context very well.

    #8080

    edselehr
    Participant

    Not a bad idea at all, F&B. But if so, then an independent arbiter should go through the records of every elected official that doesn’t follow standard procedure.

    Do you want to pay for the thousands of man hours it would take to do that?

    #8082

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    Worth it. Let’s do it. You know, so the voting public is very well informed and we get an optimal election outcome.

    🙂

    #8084

    Amus
    Participant

    What exactly is a “Clinton apologist”?

    What is there to apologize for?

    #8085

    Andy Brown
    Participant

    Many Republicans are tormented by their own email demons.
    At least a half-dozen 2016 Republican presidential prospects have felt the sting of sustained negative press coverage over their email practices, with the common denominator being an attempt to sidestep public scrutiny attached to official government accounts. Their histories with electronic communications have left them with their own unique vulnerabilities on the issue.

    In Wisconsin, as a result of a three-year probe of Gov. Scott Walker’s tenure as Milwaukee County executive — an investigation that ended in 2013 — prosecutors asserted that some of Walker’s aides set up a separate, private Internet network. Through that, staffers could send emails, via Gmail and Yahoo accounts, about both political and official business, and the use of private accounts took place even beyond that server. While Walker never faced charges, the private emails and the mixing of county and political work proved central to charges levied against two former staffers. Both pleaded guilty, though one is appealing.

    In New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s case, texts and emails between his aides revealed the now infamous plot to cause traffic problems, apparently out of political retribution.
    The story resulted in subpoenas for the governor’s office and lingering questions about Christie’s communications with staffers, including by texts, as the scandal unfolded. One year later, Christie hasn’t been found guilty of wrongdoing, but politically, the onetime GOP front-runner has never returned to the status he enjoyed before “Bridgegate” hit.

    Ryan Williams, who worked for Mitt Romney when the 2012 GOP nominee came under fire for wiping emails from the server as he left the governors’ office, recalling that their camp was barraged with bad headlines.

    Monday, Jeb Bush called for the release of Clinton’s unclassified emails. He quickly received a comeuppance: Democratic opposition research shop American Bridge circulated a story Wednesday suggesting that, like Clinton, Bush also operated his own email server to give him a greater ability to keep some of his emails private.

    Hoping to divert attention from the Clinton controversy — and draw attention to Republican vulnerabilities — the Democratic National Committee on Wednesday circulated talking points to their surrogates, highlighting email flaps involving those two candidates as well as Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Perry and Romney.

    In other words, Vern, and as I said earlier in the thread, tread lightly. What you demand for the gander might end up cooking your goose. In fact, it already has.

    #8090

    NoParty
    Participant

    Ed said>>>
    Not a bad idea at all, F&B. But if so, then an independent arbiter should go through the records of every elected official that doesn’t follow standard procedure.

    99% of the GOP would be out on their ass as would the Dems. You really want that UF&UB?

Viewing 13 posts - 61 through 73 (of 73 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.