Hillary for prison 2016

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

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

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

[Nebe]

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

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

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

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

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

[ecduzitgood]

http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/04/famous...hillary-probe/
I don't remember if this was brought up here but it seems as though it should be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

"I used to read her emails for hours and then garden".

I'd be reading the emails and day trading.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

And I suppose we can expect more of this since both Hillary and Bernie Sanders want amnesty for illegal aliens.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/12....html?referer=
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

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

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

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

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

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

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?

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

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?

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.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

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.

that's a steaming pile

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

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

So her convenience comes before security....

Again.....too big of a liar or too stupid????
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by buckman

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

That's one check mark in the "Too Stupid" column
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

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

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

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 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.

I'd note that our political oligarchs need to "help" more than one "big" business. The more they "help," the more they can entrench their power.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Nebe

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

I wonder if she keeps them in a cigar box
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/0...proval-rating/

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

So her convenience comes before security....

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?

[Sea Dangles]

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

[spence]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

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

Considering her lengthy and impressive resume, to call out an issue over email hosting as a definitive measure is pretty insignificant and trite.

[Sea Dangles]

Jeff, you are on the Hillary bandwagon regardless of the shortcomings. You have zero credibility when it comes to evaluating her accomplishments. Picture Slip as a line judge for a Pats game and you may understand my point more clearly. I am guessing Hillary could eat your young and you would grant her a pardon.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

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?

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

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

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

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

[Slipknot]

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

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

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

With this years crop of candidates.....absolutely
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

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

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

Originally Posted by spence

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

Hmmm, Solyndra concurs

Originally Posted by spence

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/0...proval-rating/

In 2013 when this was written, only a handful of folks knew about her server (well, plus the Russians, Chinese, Israelis, NORKS, Germans, Iran, and other competent intelligence services)

Originally Posted by Slipknot

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

Hahaha

[spence]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

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

Please expand.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

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

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

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

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

Pretty hard to determine if a system was hacked when there is nothing in place to monitor for it.

Part of the safeguards in place on the government systems is the actual ability to determine that something has happened.

Little things like IDS, Baselining, and log collection and review are a couple that were lacking in her case.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Please expand.

For starters, you don't think she lied about coming under sniper fire. Let's say you are a wee bit hesitant to be critical of those you adore.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

Please expand.

Softball?
You are Hillarys lackey Jeff. Apologist,need I go on. I honestly think you would hand wash her underpants. You can not evaluate her with clarity and you have proven that countless times.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device