Reply With Quote
Seriously Bookaki? You have flipped to an email defender now that Bernie is cooked? You are flailing, dude.
Hillary Clinton Doubles Down on Email Scandal, Saying 'It Was Allowed'
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton doubled down on defending her email practices as Secretary of State, arguing that the use of a personal account was “allowed,” and rules have since been “clarified.”
“This report makes clear that personal email use was the practice for other secretaries of state,” Clinton told ABC News in an interview in Las Vegas, Nevada. “It was allowed. And the rules have been clarified since I left.”
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hilla...ry?id=39400634
She's right. She's the victim of Repug-pressured "selective enforcement", selected because she's
a) a woman (Repug/rightwingnut misogyny)
b) Dem (Repug ideology denies legitimacy of any opposition. It's in the Cons ution they love and defend)
c) probably destroyer of any Repug nominee, esp Trash.
Seriously Bookaki? You have flipped to an email defender now that Bernie is cooked? You are flailing, dude.
You ing Lie. (in the genetics of rightwingnuts)
I'm saying that the Repugs are pressuring DoJ to go after Hillary, while not pressuring DoJ to go after Repugs who did exactly the same as Hillary.
And if you get your wet dream of Repugs taking down Hillary, then your boy Trash will get slaughtered by my boy Bernie.
Even if Hillary gets charged and drops out there is NO WAY the Democratic establishment gives it to Bernie. NONE. He isn't a Democrat. They will kick him to the curb and draft Biden.
Those are hipsters, not lumberjacks. You wouldn't find a lumberjack with noodle arms like that. Unfortunately we're the hipster capital of the world.
drafting Biden would really piss off Bernie's supporters, the same way Trash was threatening violence by his supporters if he didn't get the nomination.
Even if Hillary gets charged and drops out there is NO WAY the Democratic establishment gives it to Bernie. NONE. He isn't a Democrat. They will kick him to the curb and draft Biden.
Bernie has always caused with the Dems, ran as a Dem, so that's not the obstacle you dream it would be.
The report is from the IG - her own State Department. She's trying to spin this so much.
1. Clinton's email setup was never approved by State security agencies
Even though department policy mandated throughout Clinton's tenure at Foggy Bottom that day-to-day operations should be conducted via authorized means, the IG report found no evidence that the secretary of state "requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server."
According to interviews with officials in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Information Resource Management, Clinton would have had to "discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices, who in turn would have attempted to provide her with approved and secured means that met her business needs."
But those officials said they approved no such setup because of department rules and the inherent security risks.
The report said those departments "did not — and would not — approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business."
2. Clinton never sought assistance to set up her email system to transmit certain sensitive information
The department's policy also mandated that employees use approved and secure devices to transmit information known as SBU — "sensitive but unclassified" — outside State's OpenNet network, and that if they did so on a regular basis to non-department addresses, they should reach out to the Bureau of Information Resource Management.
"However, OIG found no evidence that Secretary Clinton ever contacted IRM to request such a solution, despite the fact that emails exchanged on her personal account regularly contained information marked as SBU," the report states.
3. The arrangement made staffers nervous — and management told them to keep quiet
The IG report noted that two Information Resources Management staffers had communicated their concerns with their departmental boss in late 2010.
"In one meeting, one staff member raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton’s account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements," the report noted.
The staff member recalled that the director said Clinton's personal system had already been reviewed and approved by legal staff "and that the matter was not to be discussed any further," according to the report's language.
"As previously noted, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton’s personal system," the next line of the report reads.
The other staff member who raised concerns said the director stated that the department's mission is to "support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again."
4. Clinton's chief of staff suggested setting up a separate computer
Speaking with senior officials in the Office of the Secretary and its Executive Secretariat, as well as with Patrick F. Kennedy, the department's undersecretary for management, Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills in January 2009 suggested that a separate stand-alone computer might be set up for the secretary of state "to enable her to check her emails from her desk."
That discussion came as Clinton expressed her desire to take her BlackBerry into secure areas. Kennedy called it a "great idea" and "the best solution," although the IG report found that no such arrangement was ever made.
5. Clinton worried about 'the personal being accessible'
The report's next bullet point recalls a November 2010 conversation between Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin, her deputy chief of staff for operations. According to the report, the email discussion centered around emails from Clinton's account not being able to be received by State employees. Abedin suggested, "we should talk about putting you on state email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam.”
Clinton responded: “Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”
The former secretary of state declined the OIG's request for an interview, while Abedin did not respond, according to the report.
6. Abedin rejected the idea for Clinton to use two devices
State Department officials in August 2011 discussed providing Clinton with an agency-issued BlackBerry to replace her "malfunctioning" personal BlackBerry because "her personal email server is down." Then-Executive Secretary Stephen D. Mull suggested that he would provide Clinton two devices — “one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her iden y, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests), and another which would just have phone and internet capability.”
Abedin shot down the proposal because it “doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.” The IG did not find any evidence that Clinton received a new device or address after the discussion.
7. Clinton's email system needed troubleshooting
According to emails the OIG said it reviewed from between "2010 through at least October 2012," messages between State Department staff and two individuals who provided technical support for Clinton's email server showed operational issues. "For example, in December 2010, the Senior Advisor worked with S/ES-IRM and IRM staff to resolve issues affecting the ability of emails transmitted through the clintonemail.com domain used by Secretary Clinton to reach Department email addresses using the state.gov domain," the report states.
Staffers with the office handling information technology for the Office of the Secretary met with a Clinton top technology staffer to resolve the situation. "The issue was ultimately resolved and, on December 21, 2010, S/ES-IRM staff sent senior S/ES staffers an email describing the issue and summarizing the activities undertaken to resolve it," the report stated.
The unnamed Clinton technology staffer also met with staffers in Cyber Threat Analysis Division on another occasion, the report said. The third interaction occurred in late October 2012 when Hurricane Sandy wreaked havoc on the New York City area. An email exchange between Abedin and another member of Clinton's staff "revealed that the server located in Secretary Clinton’s New York residence was down."
The Clinton technology staffer then met with Office of Information Resources Management staffers to see whether State could provide support. According to the report, S/ES-IRM staff said they told the Clinton aide they could not because the server was private.
8. The server was briefly shut down over hacking concerns
The report noted that on Jan. 9, 2011, a non-State technical adviser retained by former President Bill Clinton informed Abedin that he had shut down the server because he thought "someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to."
The same person wrote Abedin later the same day, stating, “We were attacked again so I shut [the server] down for a few min.”
"On January 10, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations emailed the Chief of Staff and the Deputy Chief of Staff for Planning and instructed them not to email the Secretary 'anything sensitive' and stated that she could 'explain more in person,'" the report stated, with Abedin being the person who sent the email.
9. Clinton and her staffers worried about being hacked but didn't report to security personnel
On May 13, 2011, the IG report states that "two of Secretary Clinton’s immediate staff discussed via email the Secretary’s concern that someone was 'hacking into her email' after she received an email with a su ious link."
Hours after that discussion, an email from William Burns, then-undersecretary of state for political affairs, appeared in Clinton's inbox carrying a link to a suspect URL and nothing else in the message.
“Is this really from you? I was worried about opening it!” Clinton responded hours later.
The IG report referenced pre-existing department policy requiring employees to report su ious incidents to Information Resources Management officials when it comes to their attention, including that it is also "required when a user suspects compromise of, among other things, a personally owned device containing personally identifiable information."
"However, OIG found no evidence that the Secretary or her staff reported these incidents to computer security personnel or anyone else within the Department," the report states.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...#ixzz49rzVvpKZ
Where are the IG's reports on Colin Powell's, etc use of private email?
Where is the IG's report on dubya's WH destroying MILLIONS of emails?
btw, MI Repug governor's do ents are exempted from FOIA.
And then there TX Repugs using private email for official business:
================
Officials' Personal Email Addresses Open to Public, Court Says
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/04...pen-public-co/
================
As I've said repeatedly, Repugs have been pressuring, SELECTIVELY, DoJ, etc into a political witch hunt of Clinton, YET AGAIN.
Congressional Repugs have YET to say anything, certainly not censure, their longest serving Repug Speaker for pedophilia and financial crime.
Which Repugs set up a private server in their own home?
Proving again you are totally disconnected from reality.
Game Over: EmailGate Just Crippled the Clinton Express
This isn't a right-wing conspiracy—the FBI will unravel it all
By John R. Schindler • 05/26/16 10:40am
<img class="size-full wp-image-651540" src="https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/gettyimages-534338706.jpg?quality=80&#038;w=635&#038;h =421" alt="Democratic presidential candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. " width="635" height="421" le="Game Over: EmailGate Just Crippled the Clinton Express" />
Democratic presidential candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Running for president this year, after her abortive 2008 effort against Barack Obama, has not worked out quite as planned for Hillary Clinton. This was supposed to be her year, at long last. After enduring a quarter-century on the national stage—including tough years by the side of her gifted but scandal-prone husband—2016 finally lined up as Ms. Clinton’s best shot at moving back into the White House, this time with her in the Oval Office.
That outcome is looking less likely by the day. First, Hillary can’t manage to finish off Senator Bernie Sanders, despite his far-left politics that until recently resided quietly on the fringe of the Democratic party. They are fringe no more, and Bernie’s sincerity and authenticity offer an appealing contrast to the often awkward and stilted Ms. Clinton. This summer’s Democratic convention in Philadelphia, where Mr. Sanders will show up with legions of adoring fans who display a passion altogether lacking in the ranks of Team Clinton, promises to be quite a show—maybe even a madhouse.
Then there’s the troubling matter of EmailGate, the long-running scandal that this column has covered in great detail. That Ms. Clinton and her senior staff misused email during her tenure as secretary of state has long been crystal-clear. Refusing to use government email for government work was a violation of policy, while Team Clinton’s routing of said emails through a private server, then putting classified information on it—including above top secret information from the Intelligence Community—looks like a violation of several federal laws.
Early denials from the Clinton camp tried to make the entire matter go away, insisting there was no “there” there. Once that folded in the face of massive evidence that something indeed had gone very awry with Secretary Clinton’s emails at Foggy Bottom, the excuses shifted to ones familiar to those who experienced the 1990s. Everybody does it. It’s not really a big deal. Above all, this is politically motivated. These false accusations are the machinations of a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
Such dodges held water for months among Hillary fans, aided by parts of the mainstream media which, long accustomed to running interference for the Clintons, continued to do so, attempting to muddy waters that to those familiar with laws and regulations on the handling of classified materials are actually decidedly clear.
That all fell apart yesterday with the release of the long-anticipated State Department Inspector General’s special report on how Foggy Bottom handles email records and cybersecurity. A shoe has dropped for Team Clinton—a very big shoe—and there will be no going back now.
It can charitably be termed scathing, and it leaves no doubt that Team Clinton has lied flagrantly to the public about EmailGate for more than a year.
The Office of the Inspector General at State, as in all federal departments, exists to ferret out internal fraud, waste and illegalities. However, State had no real IG boss from 2009 to 2013, with an acting director heading up the office. Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton were in any hurry to find a permanent director for State’s IG shop. Now we know why.
The State IG report, weighing in at over 80 pages, is crammed full of bureaucratese yet paints an indelible and detailed portrait of things going very wrong at Foggy Bottom—especially under Hillary Clinton. It can charitably be termed scathing, and it leaves no doubt that Team Clinton has lied flagrantly to the public about EmailGate for more than a year.
That the State Department’s IT systems were a mess for years was hardly a secret, and the IG report makes painfully clear that State has had a difficult time transitioning into the electronic age. Several recent secretaries of state used email in a manner that would be judged inadequate, and perhaps improper, by today’s standards, including Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, who served under President George W. Bush.
That said, only Hillary Clinton simply refused to use government email for government work—she repeatedly denied requests from State security and IT to use state.gov email—and she systematically dodged federal regulations on electronic communications and records preservation by setting up her private email server of bathroom infamy. Damningly, while several former secretaries of state cooperated with the IG in this important investigation, Ms. Clinton refused to.
As secretary of state, Ms. Clinton attempted a novel experiment of trying to avoid using any information systems that create records that can be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. The IG report includes painful details, including how she flatly refused to use state.gov email for anything, ever, citing privacy grounds. State IT was concerned because Ms. Clinton’s work emails—all being sent via her clintonmail.com address—were winding up in the spam folders of State officials. Important information was not getting where it needed to go. She needed to use official email for official business. Except she refused.
What was so important, so sensitive that Hillary had to dodge FOIA altogether? Clearly protecting her private life—whatever that might be—was valued more highly by Ms. Clinton than actually heading the Department of State.
Then we have the repeating warnings from State officials about the incredibly vulnerable nature of her ramshackle private email system from any cybersecurity perspective. These, too, were blown off by Ms. Clinton and her staff, despite several hacking efforts that staffers were aware of. Guccifer, the Romanian hacker who illegally accessed Ms. Clinton’s email during her tour at Foggy Bottom, has just pleaded guilty, and there can be little doubt that hackers more adept than he penetrated Hillary’s communications.
The FBI is investigating this case as political corruption—not just for mishandling of classified information.
Any foreign intelligence service worth its salt would have had no trouble accessing Ms. Clinton’s emails, particularly when they were unencrypted, as this column has explained in detail. Yet Hillary was more worried about the American public finding out about what she was up to via FOIA than what foreign spy services and hackers might see in her email.
What she was seeking to hide so ardently remains one of the big unanswered questions in EmailGate. Hints may be found in the recent announcement that Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, the former head of the Democratic National Committee and a longtime Clinton intimate, is under FBI investigation for financial misdeeds, specifically dirty money coming from China. In fact, Mr. McAulliffe invited one of his Beijing benefactors over to Ms. Clinton’s house in 2013. Not long after, Chinese investors donated $2 million to the Clinton Foundation.
That an illegal pay-for-play-scheme, with donations to the Clinton Foundation being rewarded by political favors from Hillary Clinton—who when she was secretary of state had an enormous ability to grant favors to foreign bidders—existed at the heart of EmailGate has been widely suspected, and we know the FBI is investigating this case as political corruption, not just for mishandling of classified information. That certainly would be something Ms. Clinton would not have wanted the public to find out about via FOIA.
As is their wont, Hillary’s loyal defenders are denouncing the State IG report as yet another “nothingburger,” adding with customary conspiratorial flair: “there are some real questions about the impartiality of the IG.” In this take, we are supposed to believe that the head of State’s IG office, appointed by President Obama, is a clandestine GOP operative.
Such escapism masquerading as hot takes won’t work anymore. Even The Washington Post, hardly a member of the VRWC, has conceded that EmailGate is a certifiably big deal, and “badly complicates Clinton’s past explanations about the server.” Its editors went further, issuing a blistering statement castigating Ms. Clinton’s “inexcusable, willful disregard of the rules.” They minced no words: “Ms. Clinton had plenty of warnings to use official government communications methods, so as to make sure that her records were properly preserved and to minimize cybersecurity risks. She ignored them.”
Although Post editors were at pains to state that Ms. Clinton had not broken any laws with her gross negligence at Foggy Bottom, the issue remains open. The FBI is investigating that complex matter now. As this column has previously reported, Hillary’s “unclassified” emails included above top secret information about undercover CIA operatives serving overseas as well as extremely sensitive NSA reports about Sudan—all information from special access programs that’s supposed to be tightly guarded.
Several U.S. counterterrorism operations went awry thanks to Hillary’s slipshod communications security.
What sort of impact those compromises will have on the investigation into EmailGate remains to be seen. We won’t know until the FBI submits its findings to the Department of Justice, probably this summer, with a recommendation to prosecute (or not). The key figure in this whole matter is Patrick Kennedy, a longtime Clinton protégé and State’s undersecretary for management (hence his nickname, “M”), who oversaw the department’s IT and security offices. Mr. Kennedy is widely believed to have enabled Hillary’s irregularities—and apparent illegalities—with email and ran internal interference for her when questions became loud and frequent. The FBI will want to unravel this all.
Hints are now emerging that Ms. Clinton’s neglect of basic security may have damaged more than her political reputation. A new report suggests several U.S. counterterrorism operations went awry thanks to Hillary’s slipshod communications security. This serious accusation is unsubstantiated yet plausible, given how easy it would have been for foreign spies to access Ms. Clinton’s email—as well as how much classified information she and her staff routinely put in “unclassified” emails. Counterintelligence officers will be investigating EmailGate for years, searching for clues about clandestine operations that went wrong, possibly due to Hillary’s IT misdeeds at Foggy Bottom.
For now, Team Clinton has plenty of problems to deal with. Their proffered excuses—that everybody does it, it’s no big deal, it’s just a fake scandal ginned up by the VRWC—have been blown apart by the State Department itself. If Hillary wants to be our next president, she needs to come up with better answers to what she was doing with her email—and why.
So far, Bernie Sanders has treated EmailGate with kid gloves, refusing to go after Ms. Clinton with gusto on the issue. Donald Trump will show no such reticence. What the State IG has revealed plays directly into Mr. Trump’s #CrookedHillary narrative. Large swathes of the public have never liked the Clintonian view that rules are for little people—not Bill and Hillary or their friends. Ms. Clinton’s misconduct as our nation’s top diplomat, including compromising our national security in order to hide her private deals, raises serious questions about her fitness as commander-in-chief. We can be sure The Donald will ask them.
http://observer.com/2016/05/game-ove...inton-express/
And the hits just keep on coming. The best part is this is all coming from the State IG report, nothing from the FBI has even come out yet.
Senate sleuths focus on ex-State Department aide in Clinton email ‘cover-up’
As Hillary Clinton seeks to rebound from a highly critical report from the State Department’s inspector general, Senate investigators and a conservative group are zeroing in on newly revealed evidence about the activities of a now retired State Department computer specialist in orchestrating what they charge was a “cover-up” of the former secretary of state’s email practices.
The role of John Bentel, whose iden y as a key figure in the email probes was first reported by Yahoo News on Wednesday, is expected to be one focus of questioning today when Clinton’s former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, is deposed in a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch over the State Department’s handling of Freedom of Information Act requests relating to Clinton’s emails, according to a source close to the case.
Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is also signaling that he intends to pursue Bentel’s role, saying that statements in the inspector general’s report show he “muzzled” staffers who warned that Clinton’s exclusive use of a private email system might be in violation of federal record-keeping laws.
Bentel served as the chief of “Information Resource Management” — essentially, the top official in charge of internal communications, security issues and record-keeping — inside the State Department’s Executive Secretariat, the professional support staff for the secretary of state. In late 2010, according to the inspector general’s report, two staffers inside his office, in separate meetings, raised concerns that Clinton’s private emails could contain government records that needed to be preserved — a standard requirement under a 1950 law known as the Federal Records Act.
One of the staffers told the inspector general that Bentel responded that Clinton’s private email account had been “reviewed and approved by Department legal staff” and “that the matter was not to be discussed any further.” In fact, according to the inspector general’s report, State Department lawyers had never approved Clinton’s use of a private email server for government communications, nor were they ever consulted about it.
The second staffer who raised concerns told the inspector general that Bentel responded that the mission of the office “is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.”
“If what these two witnesses said is true, it is an outrage, and it raises a lot of serious questions,” Grassley said in a floor statement about the inspector general’s report on Thursday. “Good and honest employees just trying to do their job were told to shut up and sit down. Concerns about the secretary’s email system being out of compliance with federal record-keeping laws were swept under the rug.”
In an interview with Yahoo News, Douglas Cox, a City University of New York law professor who specializes in the preservation of federal records, said: “That was the most shocking part of the report,” adding, “it shows there was dissent within the State Department precisely by the people responsible for insuring compliance with record-keeping and cyber-security issues — and they were told something that appears not to be true.”
Bentel, who retired from the State Department in December 2012, was questioned in late June 2015 by the House Benghazi Committee and told investigators that he had “no memory or knowledge” of Clinton’s private email server and only learned about it from the newspapers, according to an email that his lawyer, Randy Turk, sent to Judiciary Committee staffers last January. Asked about the passage involving Bentel in the inspector general’s report, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, emailed Friday: “We were not aware of that exchange cited in the report and those remarks did not reflect any instructions from the Secretary’s office.”
At the time of that interview with the Benghazi committee, the panel had no knowledge of the internal concerns raised by the two staffers in his office (whose iden ies are not revealed in the report), and the committee staffers were unable to confront him about the apparent contradictions.
Bentel declined to be interviewed by the inspector general (as did Clinton and her four top aides). He also, through Turk, rebuffed Judiciary Committee staffers’ efforts to question him. Turk did not respond to requests for comment from Yahoo News.
But on Thursday, Grassley pointed to another passage in the inspector general’s report that could raise questions about Bentel’s account. In August 2011, chief of staff Mills, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin and two other State Department officials exchanged emails about providing Clinton with a State Department BlackBerry to replace her personal one, which was malfunctioning, apparently because “her personal email server is down.”
One idea was to provide Clinton with two devices — one with a State Department email account and another that would only have phone and Internet capacity. In one email, Bentel wrote, “you should be aware that any email would go through the Department’s infrastructure and [be] subject to FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] searches.” Abedin rejected the proposal for two devices, arguing that “it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”
In testimony in the Judicial Watch lawsuit that was released late Thursday, Bentel’s boss, Lewis Lukens, the director of the Executive Secretariat, was asked directly if he had ever communicated with Bentel about Clinton’s email. Lukens replied: “Not that I remember, no.”
Now, investigators and lawyers for Judicial Watch want to know — if the account of the two staffers was accurate — whether Bentel may have been taking instructions from elsewhere in Clinton’s office. The answer, according to Cox, the law professor, could be significant, not only in the Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit, but also potentially to the FBI, which is conducting its own investigation, believed to be focusing on whether Clinton or her aides may have mishandled classified information. “This really is crucial new information,” he said.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/senate-sl...000000777.html
full OIG report here
https://www.do entcloud.org/do e...on-Server.html
Clinton Clinches Democratic Nomination
If you can trust one thing in this unpredictable election cycle, it’s that nothing, absolutely nothing whatsoever, could possibly happen in the next two months that would keep Hillary Clinton from being the Democratic nominee.
No indictment — of her or anyone close to her — would stop that from happening;
no undisclosed medical condition;
no cratering poll numbers against her prospective Republican opponent;
no historically bad (and worsening) unfavorables;
no polling showing that fully 50 percent of her primary opponent’s supporters won’t support her in the general;
no sudden disclosure of all her Wall Street transcripts, revealing that much of her campaign platform with respect to Wall Street was a lie;
no string of defeats on June 7th, producing a scenario in which Mrs. Clinton would have lost 18 of the final 25 state primaries and caucuses, the worst second-half performance of any major-party candidate in a primary election season in U.S. history;
no surprise entry into the race by Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren as a unity ticket;
no sudden and unexpected news event that changes dramatically the viability of one or many of Clinton’s campaign promises or policy positions;
no — and take it from people who sit behind desks in D.C. and New York City — there is nothing anyone could possibly do or that could possibly happen over the next two months that would cause any change whatsoever in how the super-delegates will vote on July 25th.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-a...tml?yptr=yahoo
Why Hillary Clinton Is the Worst Kind of Leader
Hillary Clinton doesn’t just make mistakes, she makes big mistakes, the kind that cost a lot of other people their lives and leave ruin and chaos in her wake. She doubles down on them and persists in them long after virtually everyone else has come to realize that they were mistakes. And then she repeats them.
Clinton voted for the Iraq War. During the next 12 years, her principal criticism of the war was not that it was a mistake but that she could do it better.
This is another defining characteristic of the Clinton way of doing things.
She doesn’t recognize that mistakes are to be avoided. Her argument, and it is a really strange one, is that she, because of her RECORD and EXPERIENCE, can do these mistakes BETTER.
Just contemplate for a moment the sheer cluelessness of someone who thinks it is a plus to argue that they make better mistakes.
And it wasn’t just that.
During those 12 years, she angrily attacked, derided, and arrogantly dismissed those who did not agree with the war, you know, the people who got it right.
Finally, in June 2014, 12 years (OK, 11 years and 8 months) after her vote for the Iraq AUMF in October 2002, she revised her position on the war in typically legalistic Clintonesque fashion. She did so in a in a well controlled venue, a book with the wildly inappropriate le Hard Choices (since the hard choice was opposing the war) where she couldn’t be cross-examined and for which she got a multi-million dollar advance. With the Clintons, it is always about the benjamins.
Anyway, here is her non-explanatory explanation and non-apology apology:
I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple.
This is like an engineer designing a plane that keeps crashing killing all on board.
After years of denying that there was any problem, she comes out and says that her calculations were correct but the numbers she was given were wrong. Oh, and lots of other people made the same mistake.
You can find similar examples with Libya, Syria, the TPP, and the Keystone pipeline, to name a few.
Beyond these, there is Hillary Clinton and the abuse of power with her email server.
There is the corrupt Hillary Clinton with her speeches to Wall Street and the Clinton Global Initiative.
There is the blatantly lying in your face Hillary Clinton paid for by Wall Street who tells the rubes she’s going to fight for them, that she is going to create jobs for them.
There is the “I’m so experienced” Hillary Clinton who’s solution to the economy is to turn it over to her grifter husband Bill.
http://www.ianwelsh.net/why-hillary-...ind-of-leader/
Oligarchs propose, elect: Trash vs Hillary,
plus Repug MISgovernance/Christian Sharia/political corruption at all levels:
America, 99% Americans are ed and un able.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 05-28-2016 at 07:35 AM.
Staggering over the Finish Line: Latest NBC Poll Shows Massive Clinton Nosedive in California
The Latest..After leading by double digits in poll after poll, Clinton's lead has totally evaporated to Bernie Sanders in the Golden state. If Secretary Clinton happens to lose this extremely diverse state by double digits, it will be seen as a embarrassment of epic proportions.
California Democratic Presidential Primary NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 49, Sanders 47
Many are insisting that HRC will clinch the nomination before the polls close in California. They assume she will have a majority of pledged delegates in NJ and will be able to call it at that point. That's false. She will not clinch the nomination until the convention. This is why:
Of the remaining states (California excluded), there are 218 delegates up for grabs.
Hillary Clinton still needs 257 delegates to get the 2026 majority.
California is the last state to close polls on that day making it the deciding state, not New Jersey.
Even if she won EVERY delegate leading up to California, she still wouldn't have the majority.
Also, she still needs 614 to get the 2383 majority. That is also impossible even after California votes. She would have to get 71% of all the remaining delegates for that to happen.
After California polls close, we will know if she clinched the majority of pledged. However, even if she did, it all depends on how close Bernie Sanders gets before we even consider super delegates. If he is very close, which is a real possibility, he will have a strong argument at the convention to take a second look and reconsider who they should nominate for the nomination.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Pagliano pleads the 5th...
Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...-in-email-caseThe man believed to have set up and maintained Hillary Clinton’s private email server will assert his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions as part of an open records lawsuit against the State Department.
Bryan Pagliano will decline to answer questions from Judicial Watch, the conservative legal watchdog group, during a deposition scheduled for Monday, his lawyers wrote in a court filing on Wednesday afternoon.
Developing...
Intel source: IG report ups pressure on DOJ to seek criminal charges against Clinton
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...-clinton.html#The recently released State Department inspector general report, which found Hillary Clinton broke government rules with her personal email use, increases "the likelihood and pressure" for the Justice Department to pursue criminal charges, an intelligence source familiar with the FBI investigation told Fox News.
"It is very harmful to her and increases the likelihood and pressure on DOJ to indict," said the source, who was not authorized to speak on the record. " is not evidence in itself, but it clears up confusion Department of State rules and makes the IG a witness, and the people they interviewed, to her computer antics being done without permission."
The ongoing FBI criminal probe -- investigating Clinton's emails practices as secretary of state -- is focused on whether the more than 2,100 classified emails discovered on her server cons ute a violation of federal code, including the Espionage Act’s 18 USC 793, known as the "gross negligence" statute. FBI Director James Comey plans to make a recommendation based on the evidence, and if the findings merit criminal charges, the decision to prosecute ultimately rests with Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
The 83-page inspector general's report, released last week, concluded that Clinton and her team consistently broke government rules for email and record-keeping. The decision to use a personal, unsecured server exclusively for government business had the effect of moving classified information outside secure government channels.
Fox News first reported in November 2015 that another statute, 18 USC 1001, also known as the "false statements statute," was under FBI consideration. This section pertains to "materially false" statements given either in writing, orally or through a third party to a federal officer. Each felony violation is subject to five years in prison.
"(The) report will be useful as rebuttal, potential evidence in 18 USC 1001 charges and establishing aspects of 18 USC 793," the source said...
Demopocalypse: Jon Stewart Comes Out of Retirement
http://www.downvids.net/demopocalyps...nt-813527.html
Let this dig in...
Many people might not remember the news that the State Department sent the subpoenas to the Clinton Foundation. Here is the story from back in Feb 2016:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...c2f_story.htmlInvestigators with the State Department issued a subpoena to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation last fall seeking do ents about the charity’s projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state, according to people familiar with the subpoena and written correspondence about it.
The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons.
Just like Hillary's IT guy, Bryan Pagliano, Hillary had Huma working for both her own private interests and for the State Department.
According to USC 18 section 201-209:
No employee of the U.S. government may receive anything of value “for or because of” any official act performed or to be performed by that employee or officer;12 no employee may receive or share in compensation for private “representational services” rendered to parties in any matter before a federal agency;13 federal employees may not represent private parties in any matter in which the United States is a party or is interested, before an agency of the government or a court, whether for compensation or not;14 federal employees must disqualify themselves from working on any government matter in which they have a personal financial interest, or in which a firm or en y for whom they serve as an officer or employee has a financial interest;15 and no executive branch employee may be compensated by a private source for his or her government work, that is, one may not receive salary supplementation from outside private sources for services performed within the scope of one’s federal employment.16
Furthermore, no federal government officer or employee may receive any compensation (“emoluments”) from a foreign government or other official foreign en y, without the consent of Congress,17 nor may any federal employee act as an “agent” of a “foreign principal.”18 Employees of the federal government who earn over a particular amount are restricted by tax consequences from “self-dealings” with private foundations, which may include limitations on the receipt of compensation and expenses from such en ies.19
Plain and simple, Abedin and Pagliano were double paid for the services they rendered for Hillary, and that is illegal. The minimum punishment is 1 year in prison with a 5 year maximum. Pagliano knew this, as did Hillary, and is one of the reasons he plead the 5th and likely received a plea deal. Just before the story broke on the Clinton Foundation Subpoenas it was reported that the FBI had expanded it's investigation of the private server to the Clinton Foundation: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...lic-corruption
Judge orders Obama administration to release new Clinton emails
Judge orders Obama administration to release new Clinton emails
TheHill.com
A federal judge has ordered the Obama administration to release new emails connected to Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonNRA attacks Clinton over gun controlRyan: Trump's comments about judge 'out of left field'Hispanic leaders frustrated by silence from Trump campaignMORE before Democratic National Convention in July.
In an order late on Wednesday, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson told the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to hand over to the Republican National Committee (RNC) whatever records it could as part of an RNC’s open-records lawsuit on July 11.
After that, USAID will need to consult with the State Department about hundreds of other pages of do ents, which could be released at some point in the future.
The RNC sued the aid agency in March, seeking two sets of communications: those between USAID officials and former aides at the State Department, as well as those between USAID and private domain names associated with Clinton, former President Bill Cl and others including the Clinton Foundation. The effort appeared to be related to allegations that the former secretary of State’s family foundation had undue influence on USAID.
The RNC lawsuit was one of several it has filed seeking records connected to Clinton, the likely Democratic presidential nominee, in a preview of a battle sure to last through the general election.
Before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, USAID has claimed that it has discovered approximately 3,300 pages of records that it might be able to hand over to the Republican Party organization. But roughly 2,600 of those reportedly need to be cleared with the State Department before they can be released.
In her order on Wednesday, Jackson said USAID should release to the RNC what it can by July 11 and determine a schedule for releasing the rest.
The time frame would put the release of the first batch of emails just one week before the Republican National Convention in Cleveland on July 18 and two weeks before the Democratic convention begins on July 25.
Critics of Clinton, however, will likely be wary of the State Department, which is notoriously slow at responding to Freedom of Information Act requests and has been buried underneath a barrage of demands related to Clinton’s email history in recent months.
Separately late on Wednesday, the Obama administration filed a motion trying to kill a different RNC open-records lawsuit targeting the State Department. That suit is seeking email messages from a slew of Clinton’s former top aides.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...ore-convention
uh oh boutons...your favorite rag is taking it's turn on the Clintons
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/03/the_...rent_to_blame/
The Clinton's game has been known for a long time.
Hillary is still better the your lover boy Trash.
any Black man or woman that votes for Hillary, tbh..smh..
Last edited by HarlemHeat37; 06-04-2016 at 02:56 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
