Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman (Post 1098618)

I keep saying this....she was SecState....every piece of communication she received should be treated, at the very least, as unclassified but sensitive. Even a lunch date with someone shows the movement of the 5th highest official in the United States. Total disregard on her part for securing her communications

So she's either to big of a liar to be president or to stupid to be president.....it's one or the other.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098623)

Then why not issue her a secure blackberry? From what we know right now the emails on her sever were safer than the ones on state.gov :hee:

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1098624)

http://www.investors.com/politics/ca...e-did-legally/

And then there is this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098632)

It's just shocking that the State Department would help large US businesses navigate trade issues with foreign governments isn't it?

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1098633)

As the article points out, that is called crony capitalism. Something Hillary is so much against, and which she promises to clean up. And what's even more smelly is the money Corning donated to Hilary and to her foundation. Not illegal. But . . . remember, Spence . . . the smell test. Your beloved smell test. Do you detect a stink there, Spence?

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098634)

Not based on that information alone. It's no secret that as NY Senator Clinton developed a good relationship with Corning which actually was part of her job. If it's crony capitalism or not would really depend on the dynamics of the relationship.

If Clinton's back is scratched for helping Corning with funding or a trade issue that's beneficial for the US economy or workers, that's not the same thing as routing tax dollars for weapons the DoD doesn't want or a bridge to nowhere...

It's also wrong to assume that just because money is changing there's an under the table deal in play. Often the business interest who's working the hardest to educate the legislator will shape their opinion and certainly gain influence.

I'd note that as Sec State she helped other big US businesses beyond Corning.

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098623)

Then why not issue her a secure blackberry? From what we know right now the emails on her sever were safer than the ones on state.gov :hee:

Originally Posted by buckman (Post 1098625)

She didn't want the blackBerry. Remember she want to carry too many devices ? Lmao she's an idiot
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098634)

Not based on that information alone.

Aha . . . the Clintonesque parsing of words . . .

It's no secret that as NY Senator Clinton developed a good relationship with Corning which actually was part of her job.

Oh, really? It's a Senator's job to develop relationships with individual businesses in their State? Did she touch base with all the mom and pop stores in NY? Or all the other businesses? Did she develop better "relationships" with businesses which didn't contribute money to her?

If it's crony capitalism or not would really depend on the dynamics of the relationship.

It's crony CAPITALISM. It's about capital, about money. Giving money for influence and favors and advantage over competitors. Getting money to pay for acquisition of power. Returning favors, influence, and privilege in order to maintain power. You know . . . the everyday politics which drives our oligarchic system of "relationships" between BIG business and BIG government. That's the type of "dynamic" that voters, with at least a marginal awareness of how we are ruled, are angry about. And Hillary is good at preaching what she will do for the little guy while she gets her back scratched by the big guys.

If Clinton's back is scratched for helping Corning with funding or a trade issue that's beneficial for the US economy Corning which was a big contributor to HIllary's political campaigns and her foundation or its workers, that's not the same thing as routing tax dollars for weapons the DoD doesn't want or a bridge to nowhere... No, not the"same" kind of cronyism, just one of the different kinds.

It's also wrong to assume that just because money is changing there's an under the table deal in play.

And it's wrong to assume that there isn't.

Often the business interest who's working the hardest by paying the most to educate :biglaugh::biglaugh: the legislator will shape their opinion and certainly gain influence.

Yup, gaining influence. That's one of the purposes of crony capitalism.

I'd note that as Sec State she helped other big US businesses beyond Corning.

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1098640)

I'm sure she has multiple devices in the back of her sock drawer :hidin:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman (Post 1098637)

So her convenience comes before security....

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles (Post 1098651)

The problem is your candidate is a poor decision maker. This is really not up for debate, it just happens to be highlighted due to the fact she is running for president. Other than that Mrs Lincoln,did you enjoy the play?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098649)

I'm sure she had people telling her it was ok. She's not an expert and wouldn't have moved forward without at least legal council doing a review. Again, this was before they changed the policy...

Seems like this is one that slipped through the cracks. Doesn't appear to be mal intent, nobody was hurt that we know of, what's the problem again?

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman (Post 1098660)

....and there's another check mark in the "Too Stupid" column.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098663)

With that criteria you'd invalidate anyone from running for POTUS.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098623)

Then why not issue her a secure blackberry? From what we know right now the emails on her sever were safer than the ones on state.gov :hee:

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098634)

If it's crony capitalism or not would really depend on the dynamics of the relationship.

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098647)

Originally Posted by Slipknot (Post 1098667)

I'd make a Great line judge, I would eject Rex Ryan in the first quarter for sure:uhuh:

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles (Post 1098659)

You have zero credibility when it comes to evaluating her accomplishments.

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1098754)

No. The secure emails on the state secure system were far more secure than on sec.state.bathroom

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098756)

We know that state.gov was hacked. No evidence her private server was to date...

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098755)

Please expand.

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1098755)

Please expand.