Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

WyomingCoog

Hillary Emails - Too Damaging to Release

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Akkula said:

You guys are always trying to create scandals and hyper inflate everything to atomic proportions.  Can you blame everyone for yawning when you cry wolf once again?

You are certainly free to judge as you wish.  Yawn away.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Didn't we already  all know this stuff about her?  That's why it's not a revelation to me.  If she wasn't using a work server, what do you think, she magically would never have sensitive stuff come her way?  I am surprised you are surprised, to be frank.

No one is surprised except morons like you and Akkula.  Even Commissar2001 is in hiding.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, renoskier said:

No shit, why do it in the first place?  It seems like a pain in the ass to me. Did she think it was going to be more secure than a State Department server? She may have a point. I don't think this is going to amount to anything, maybe I'm wrong but I think it's just more noise.

There are 1000's of guys prosecuted and jailed not to mention loss of jobs due to much less then has been found out about Hilary.

Again, nothing will convince and ignorant racist liberal of anything wrong with his side of the political spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her only line of defense is to claim incompetence and play the "now they are just picking on me" card. She has a problem that isn't going away. 

She's fine with the dims.  Many of them just choose to dismiss or at least downplay the severity of the allegations. They will vote for her in the general, no matter what. 

She still has wide support among woman voters who seem to believe the most important thing is to elect a woman, no matter how flawed and corrupt she may be. But that support is dwindling. 

Independent voters will more problematic for her.  They will dissect her bullshit and not believe her spin, lies and excuses. 

"Don't underestimate Joe Biden's ability to F@*k things up."

Barack Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, nomascows said:

I have yet to hear a good reason why she would set up her own email system in the first place.  Did she think that the Federal Government didn't have one of its own?

Because, like so much of the Federal government, it was clunky and didn't  work very well. It is undependable especially in terms of timely sending and receiving of emails

One of the Final Five..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, mysfit said:

Because, like so much of the Federal government, it was clunky and didn't  work very well. It is undependable especially in terms of timely sending and receiving of emails

I never had a problem using SIPRNet :shrug:

 

It's more plausible she was just an idiot who wanted to do things her way than her thinking the server was unreliable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, renoskier said:

The New York Times editorial board doesn't seem to believe this scandal is going to be a problem:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/opinion/sunday/hillary-clinton-endorsement.html?emc=edit_na_20160130&nlid=68276061&ref=cta&_r=0

I wonder how big a bribe it took for the New York times to support her this time?   Their support means nothing.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/8/hillary-clinton-gave-100k-new-york-times-group-sam/

A little-known private foundation controlled by Bill and Hillary Clintondonated $100,000 to the New York Times’ charitable fund in 2008, the same year the newspaper’s editorial page endorsed Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary, according to tax documents reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, mysfit said:

Because, like so much of the Federal government, it was clunky and didn't  work very well. It is undependable especially in terms of timely sending and receiving of emails

You are full of shit. 

She did it so she would have control of the emails. No one ever asks what was in the 30,000 emails she deleted and never were released.  I'm sure you believe they were all just emails regarding Chelsea's wedding and the other nonsense H said. But then again you are an idiot. 

She has lied ever since this story has come out and hopefully will be indicted. Many people have gone to jail for much, much less.

What really bothers about this whole story is idiots like mysfit and USSR2001 blindly defending Clinton because she is a woman or a dim. If this was Dick Cheney they'd be after him with a pitchfork. Which they should be, and I'd agree with them. I don't care what letter you have next to your name, when you do stuff like she did you need to go to jail.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Billings said:

I think it was pretty standard practice in the state department and dumb but was not a new practice.  She was not the first sec of state to run her own email server but will probably be the last.  Shouldn't we be going after all of them?

Colin Powell carried 3 devices with him.  One for his personal e-mail and 2 others to handle classified e-mail.  So like every ignorant racist liberal you act like he did the same thing as Clinton by having his own server.  You just forget to mention the rest because you are dishonest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

I wonder how big a bribe it took for the New York times to support her this time?   Their support means nothing.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/8/hillary-clinton-gave-100k-new-york-times-group-sam/

A little-known private foundation controlled by Bill and Hillary Clintondonated $100,000 to the New York Times’ charitable fund in 2008, the same year the newspaper’s editorial page endorsed Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary, according to tax documents reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Times broke the story to begin with. Idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jackmormon said:

No one here knows if Hillary committed a crime. Of course the conservatives are convinced. There were also convinced about White Water, Travelgate, Cowgate, Vince Fostergate...

The fact that the classified emails on her server were cut and pasted from the government NIPRNet system to a non classified server is an illegal act and criminal. Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan are being investigated as the culprits for reformatting the documents. Pretty cut and dried for most people that a crime was committed. Whether she is indicted or whether one or all of her aides will fall on their sword is the only question. Then again, they could all be pardoned by the outgoing president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rebelbacker said:

You are full of shit. 

 

When the story first broke that was mentioned by several reports which included confirmation by other people he had worked in the State department.

 

You can disagree, respectfully, without making it personal. Making it personal doesn't make your point, it just shows you lack maturity and the ability to carry on polite and civil discourse. And I don't have the time or interest in dealing with people like you.

One of the Final Five..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mysfit said:

When the story first broke that was mentioned by several reports which included confirmation by other people he had worked in the State department.

 

You can disagree, respectfully, without making it personal. Making it personal doesn't make your point, it just shows you lack maturity and the ability to carry on polite and civil discourse. And I don't have the time or interest in dealing with people like you.

You're a stupid ++++ just like Jackmoron and all the rest of the ignorant racist liberals on this board.

Hillary could be caught handing nuclear weapons to the Iranians and you would still say it was a republican plot.

You have no credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mysfit said:

When the story first broke that was mentioned by several reports which included confirmation by other people he had worked in the State department.

 

You can disagree, respectfully, without making it personal. Making it personal doesn't make your point, it just shows you lack maturity and the ability to carry on polite and civil discourse. And I don't have the time or interest in dealing with people like you.

Stories evolve, especially when the truth starts to come out. That you actually still  believe any of that, or people in the State Department that are trying to cover for this mess is astounding. 

You are right I shouldn't have attacked you personally even though I was just being honest and telling you how I really feel about you. Hopefully you have a safe space you can go to and make yourself feel better.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...