Jump to content



Photo

Hillary Clinton


  • Please log in to reply
1269 replies to this topic

#201 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 08 January 2016 - 02:33 PM

This is an interesting email... 

 

Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/08/whoa-hillary-e-mail-instructs-aide-to-transmit-classified-e-mail-without-markings/

 

 

 

C05787519.jpg



#202 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 13 January 2016 - 01:40 PM

I'm not sure how this will all unfold... seems pretty serious though... Is it time for Hill to be custom fitted for a bright orange pantsuit?

 

I'm curious... have any of you folks that have been long time Clinton supporters changed your mind about Clinton?

 

My sources tell me that the bureau already has the case “locked they are building a case that is unassailable. ” And another source said the case that the FBI has built was ready two weeks ago.
 
The evidence involves material from Hillary’s server that the FBI has gathered in the course of its months-long investigation of her and her staff. Last week others also weighed in, most notably former prosecutor Joseph diGenova. From everything I can tell, this story is going to get worse for Hillary. I assume Ms. Herridge agrees with me.
 
The charges will consist of some of the following:
 
• Improper disclosure or retention of classified information.
 
• Destruction of government records.
 
• Lying to federal agents.
 
• Lying under oath.
 
• Obstruction of justice.
 
One source told me that, “the [leadership] of the FBI is deeply engaged in the investigation.” And another said the bureau has “no choice” but to ask Attorney General Loretta Lynch for indictments. The FBI’s director, James Comey, has a reputation for being incorruptible. He wanted to indict Gen. David Petraeus on far fewer charges than his investigators have come up with on Hillary. Now his chief of staff has reportedly said that the bureau plans to seek indictments of Hillary and her aides despite the politics of the case. One source told me, “the bureau doesn’t care about politics.” This case is seen as a national security matter.

 

http://www.washingto...oblems-multipl/

 


  • kelley and Goldwater Girl like this

#203 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 07:31 AM

I'm still with Hillary. She is the best prepared person to step into the White House in a long time.  That being said, I could easily back Bernie Sanders against any of the top tier R candidates.

 

I've not followed the email problems... always seemed like a big nothingburger.  The Washington Times article reads like the National Enquirer, seriously. 



#204 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 08:27 AM

I've not followed the email problems... always seemed like a big nothingburger.  The Washington Times article reads like the National Enquirer, seriously. 

 

Seems odd to me... if any candidate that I was supporting was under criminal investigation by the FBI. I'd be paying very close attention to the situation. An FBI investigation should be a red flag that the person under investigation may have committed criminal acts. It's not a political situation at all... 



#205 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 08:50 AM

I never said it wasn't a red flag, but it is an investigation at this point, right?



#206 apirateatheart

apirateatheart

    Resident

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 232 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 02:28 PM

Snowman, I am curious.   In what way do you feel Hillary is "prepared" to be president?



#207 Persona Non Grata

Persona Non Grata

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,664 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 02:36 PM

Seems odd to me... if any candidate that I was supporting was under criminal investigation by the FBI. I'd be paying very close attention to the situation. An FBI investigation should be a red flag that the person under investigation may have committed criminal acts. It's not a political situation at all... 

 

Do you have any recommendations where one might read up on this investigation besides the highly biased and notoriously inaccurate Washington Times? Has the FBI released any official statements that you are aware of?



#208 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 02:40 PM

Do you have any recommendations where one might read up on this investigation besides the highly biased and notoriously inaccurate Washington Times? Has the FBI released any official statements that you are aware of?

 

Sure... here are over 7 million choices... you'll have to decide which ones are acceptable to you...  :yes:

 

http://lmgtfy.com/?q...hillary clinton



#209 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 03:19 PM

Snowman, I am curious.   In what way do you feel Hillary is "prepared" to be president?

 

Government needs to be done by people who care about others. Its' her lifetime of experiences, especially her engagement with important issues that I care about. 



#210 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 03:54 PM

I've hidden a bunch of childish banter... 

 

Now maybe we can get back on topic... Hillary Clinton... going to jail soon I believe...  :thumbsup:


  • grammy likes this

#211 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 14 January 2016 - 04:14 PM

One can only hope.

#212 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 21 January 2016 - 08:17 AM

Breakfast Club Campaign  Trail
 
Small crowd greets Bill Clinton in New Hampshire
January 20, 2016
By Olaf Ekberg

Bill Clinton is like the aging rocker who has gone from playing baseball stadiums to barely filling night clubs.

Only about 100 people turned out to see Clinton in Salem, New Hampshire Wednesday as he campaigned for his wife.

The event, hosted in Hillary’s campaign’s office, was a stark contrast to Republican rival Donald Trump’s crowds.

Clinton delivered a largely negative speech, attacking Republicans over the Benghazi investigation and their various plans to repair the damage created by the Obama administration.

WMUR reports Clinton “glossed over” Bernie Sanders’s current 27-point lead in the New Hampshire polls, calling it a “home field disadvantage.”
Clinton repeatedly called Hillary a “change maker.”

http://www.theameric...-new-hampshire/

Edited by Savile Row, 21 January 2016 - 08:18 AM.


#213 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 01:51 PM

Are we? I'm not so sure... however I do like the signs that we are seeing that the end may be near... 

 

We are witnessing the end of the House of Clinton

 

State of the 2016 Race
A column for The Hill analyzing the current state of the 2016 presidential race.
 
It is the beginning of the end of the House of Clinton:
 
1. There is the stench of political death around Hillary, Bill, Chelsea and the entire House of Clinton.
 
2. You could feel it when Republican front-runner Donald Trump hit back — hard — over the "penchant for sexism" charge by basically calling Hillary Clinton an enabler in the former president's sexual shenanigans.
 

  • GrumpyGranny likes this

#214 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 05:12 PM

2016-01-27-13264fec_large.jpg


  • GrumpyGranny, kelley, Quasar and 1 other like this

#215 woo

woo

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,726 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 03:42 PM

The white house confirms her crimes.

http://wgntv.com/201...clinton-emails/

 

The Obama administration is confirming for the first time that Hillary Clinton’s unsecured home server contained some closely guarded secrets, including material requiring one of the highest levels of classification.


  • kelley and CityBoy like this

#216 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 05:21 PM

Drip, drip, drip.


  • kelley and Tina like this

#217 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,123 posts

Posted 03 February 2016 - 09:22 AM

Whoosh. The stories coming out of the Iowa caucuses...Bernie peeps now know she's shady AF too.

#218 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 03 February 2016 - 09:53 AM

haha... like the berniebros aren't shady af too.

 

it's politics... they'll all fall in line either way it turns out.  the Democrat will win in November, yaya.


Edited by snowman, 03 February 2016 - 09:54 AM.


#219 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 03 February 2016 - 07:46 PM

Breakfast Club Waterwater Scandal

 

Feds fight disclosure of Hillary Clinton Whitewater indictment drafts
By Josh Gerstein
02/03/16
The National Archives is fighting a lawsuit trying to force disclosure of several draft indictments of Hillary Clinton

prepared by a Whitewater prosecutor in the 1990s.

In a brief filed late Tuesday, Justice Department lawyers and the Archives argue that disclosure of the draft indictments would lead to an unwarranted invasion of Clinton's privacy and violate a court rule protecting grand jury secrecy.

"Despite the role that Mrs. Clinton occupied as the First Lady during President Clinton's administration, Mrs. Clinton maintains a strong privacy interest in not having information about her from the files of the Independent Counsel disclosed," wrote Martha Wagner Murphy, chief of the Archives "special access" branch that stores records of former independent counsels. "As an uncharged person, Hillary Rodham Clinton retains a significant interest in her personal privacy despite any status as a public figure."

The conservative group Judicial Watch, which filed suit for the records in October

under the Freedom of nformation Act, is arguing that Clinton's ongoing bid for the presidency

reinforces the public interest in records about her alleged misconduct.

 

"She's one of the most well-known women in the world, seeking the office of the presidency and her privacy interests outweigh the public interest in knowing what's in that indictment? It's absurd and it's shameful that the administration is proposing this," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in an interview. "This is a political decision to protect her candidacy—because it is laughable, legally."
http://www.politico....t-drafts-218681


Edited by Savile Row, 03 February 2016 - 07:46 PM.

  • Quasar likes this

#220 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 04 February 2016 - 09:31 AM

Do we have a right to know? 

 

Feds fight disclosure of Hillary Clinton Whitewater indictment drafts
By JOSH GERSTEIN 02/03/16 05:33 PM EST
The National Archives is fighting a lawsuit trying to force disclosure of several draft indictments of Hillary Clinton prepared by a Whitewater prosecutor in the 1990s.
 
In a brief filed late Tuesday, Justice Department lawyers and the Archives argue that disclosure of the draft indictments would lead to an unwarranted invasion of Clinton's privacy and violate a court rule protecting grand jury secrecy.
 
"She's one of the most well-known women in the world, seeking the office of the presidency and her privacy interests outweigh the public interest in knowing what's in that indictment? It's absurd and it's shameful that the administration is proposing this," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in an interview. "This is a political decision to protect her candidacy—because it is laughable, legally."
 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users