Hillary Clinton exclusively used personal emails at st dpt

[Matt1970]

Law was broken? link?

I said law? Link?

 

[soundforbjt]

I said law? Link?

"Wrongdoing" in the eyes of who? better?

 

[rudeguy]

I said law? Link?

This is actually a great point. Democrats believe that anything legal is not wrong. For them, the government should say what is right and what is wrong.

 

[soundforbjt]

This is actually a great point. Democrats believe that anything legal is not wrong. For them, the government should say what is right and what is wrong.

Since the "people" are the government (unless you don't agree with the Constitution), who gets to say what's right or wrong?

 

[rudeguy]

Since the "people" are the government (unless you don't agree with the Constitution), who gets to say what's right or wrong?

thank you for confirming

 

[First]

thank you for confirming

lulz troll.

 

[pcgeek11]

Hillary Clinton - Hypocrisy at its finest;

Ambassador Hillary fired for using private email charges ‘double standard’ at work. March 8, 2015 by Michael Dorstewitz

The former ambassador to Kenya, who was fired in 2012 for using a private email account in violation of State Department policy set by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told CNN Sunday that his dismissal was unfair in light of the Clinton revelations.

Scott Gration, a retired Air Force general before his appointment to the ambassadorship, said Clinton’s own exclusive use of private email accounts for official business meant his firing represented a “double standard.”

“As I was going through it, I did not perceive that it was a double standard because I did not know of Secretary Clinton’s use of a commercial email account,” Gration told CNN host Michael Smerconish on “State of the Union.”

“But as I’ve reflected on it in the last couple of days, it does appear like there was a different standard that was used in my case and that has been used in hers.”

After noting that Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, did the actual firing of Gration, Smerconish wondered if Mills had known her own boss was violating the department’s prohibition on private email.

“In the end, we’ll have to ask Cheryl Mills that question,” the ambassador said. “But I would assume that she knew.”

Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/03...-double-standard-at-work-185349#ixzz3UFPYHuZk

 

[Matt1970]

"Wrongdoing" in the eyes of who? better?

So it wasn't against the rules?

 

[boomerang]

After noting that Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, did the actual firing of Gration, Smerconish wondered if Mills had known her own boss was violating the department’s prohibition on private email.

Hell, Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin were both in violation themselves. Emails of the SoS and staff are part of the public record but for obvious reasons can't be if they are sent through and contained on a private server.

I read yesterday that the hackers are having a field day. The server has actually been traced to a block of office space in Harlem that houses Bill Clinton's office. It's not at their home and it is still in use or at the least still connected to the net. It evidently hasn't been patched at the oldest against some exploits that have been known about since 2010.

 

[Bowfinger]

Hillary Clinton - Hypocrisy at its finest;

Ambassador Hillary fired for using private email charges ‘double standard’ at work. March 8, 2015 by Michael Dorstewitz

The former ambassador to Kenya, who was fired in 2012 for using a private email account in violation of State Department policy set by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told CNN Sunday that his dismissal was unfair in light of the Clinton revelations.

Scott Gration, a retired Air Force general before his appointment to the ambassadorship, said Clinton’s own exclusive use of private email accounts for official business meant his firing represented a “double standard.”

“As I was going through it, I did not perceive that it was a double standard because I did not know of Secretary Clinton’s use of a commercial email account,” Gration told CNN host Michael Smerconish on “State of the Union.”

“But as I’ve reflected on it in the last couple of days, it does appear like there was a different standard that was used in my case and that has been used in hers.”

After noting that Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, did the actual firing of Gration, Smerconish wondered if Mills had known her own boss was violating the department’s prohibition on private email.

“In the end, we’ll have to ask Cheryl Mills that question,” the ambassador said. “But I would assume that she knew.”

Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/03...-double-standard-at-work-185349#ixzz3UFPYHuZk

Mostly Untrue.

You guys need to stop swallowing everything you're fed by the nutter media. Their business model is lying to the rubes to keep them outraged. Don't you get tired of being played?

 

[Bowfinger]

"Wrongdoing" in the eyes of who? better?

I always laugh when you try to get these guys to give a real answer. Its always deflection, never answer a question directly. ...

 

[FerrelGeek]

 

[TheSlamma]

Burden of proof is on the accuser, in America.

Except when you wipe away your party bias and actually read the LAW

 

[werepossum]

lmao!

 

[rudeguy]

Could you imagine having to listen to her shreaking voice all the time? The speeches she has given were like nails on a chalk board.


:shudder:

 

[inachu]

I tweeted Hilary Clinton not to worry since it was in the news 2 days ago that hackers broke in her emails server and copied all her email data anyway.

 

[bshole]

Oddly enough, the more Hillary is wrongfully attacked for this fake "scandal", the more I support her. It is quite odd really in that I am oh so tired of the Clinton and Bush dynasties. There is just something inside me that roots for those who are wrongfully and egregiously hounded for political gain. I have decided that in this case, there is lots of smoke and no fire and therefor Hillary is on the side of the angels. If Hillary is to lose in the upcoming election cycle, it should be on her record and her vision, not a partisan witch hunt.

 

[MiniDoom]

Oddly enough, the more Hillary is wrongfully attacked for this fake "scandal", the more I support her. It is quite odd really in that I am oh so tired of the Clinton and Bush dynasties. There is just something inside me that roots for those who are wrongfully and egregiously hounded for political gain. I have decided that in this case, there is lots of smoke and no fire and therefor Hillary is on the side of the angels. If Hillary is to lose in the upcoming election cycle, it should be on her record and her vision, not a partisan witch hunt.

Do you realize this is also being pushed by liberals who want Warren to run? I have a few liberal friend who couldn't be happier about this...

 

[bshole]

Do you realize this is also being pushed by liberals who want Warren to run? I have a few liberal friend who couldn't be happier about this...

Actually I did not know this. I hate to admit this but I don't know a damn thing about Warren other than the name. If indeed it is being pushed by liberals, it would most definitely modify my view.

 

[werepossum]

Actually I did not know this. I hate to admit this but I don't know a damn thing about Warren other than the name. If indeed it is being pushed by liberals, it would most definitely modify my view.

You should look into Fauxcahontas. She's at least as progressive as is the Hildabeast, but seems (to me anyway) to be more ethical. And she's written some legislation that blends a lot of populism into progressive theory in ways that seem common sense. (Again, to me; YMMV.) I like her, and I can't say that about more than a handful of prominent Dems. She reminds me of that little nutjob Kucinich who married that redheaded Brit Amazon in that she genuinely seems to be as represented. To the degree any politician can be anyway. Don't know I could vote for her due to her Second Amendment opposition, but I can at least contemplate it without being ill or having to posit her running against a Santorum or Perry.

 

[MiniDoom]

Actually I did not know this. I hate to admit this but I don't know a damn thing about Warren other than the name. If indeed it is being pushed by liberals, it would most definitely modify my view.

well, liberals and righties. Liberals dislike Hillary because she's a neo-con and not liberal enough. And people on the right, because it's Hillary, imo.

 

[theeedude]

You should look into Fauxcahontas. She's at least as progressive as is the Hildabeast, but seems (to me anyway) to be more ethical. And she's written some legislation that blends a lot of populism into progressive theory in ways that seem common sense. (Again, to me; YMMV.) I like her, and I can't say that about more than a handful of prominent Dems. She reminds me of that little nutjob Kucinich who married that redheaded Brit Amazon in that she genuinely seems to be as represented. To the degree any politician can be anyway. Don't know I could vote for her due to her Second Amendment opposition, but I can at least contemplate it without being ill or having to posit her running against a Santorum or Perry.

Incessant name calling just makes you sound dumb.

 

[rudeguy]

Incessant name calling just makes you sound dumb.

Your posts just make you sound dumb.

 

[werepossum]

Incessant name calling just makes you sound dumb.

Whereas pretending that Hillary set up her own private email server only for the convenience of having her aid carry just one device would make me sound smart?

 

[runzwithsizorz]

Do you realize this is also being pushed by liberals who want Warren to run? I have a few liberal friend who couldn't be happier about this...

This latest attack could very well have been orchestrated/supported by the left.
Think about it, all the other scandals might involve dear leader, or his administration, which would be a no-no. Whereas this one is all on her.