Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19742
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by John Q. Public » Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:19 am

Bernie Madoff is also smarter than most. Being the slickest person in the room isn't exactly an admirable quality.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19742
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by John Q. Public » Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:28 am

Off Topic
I love my server. I love my server. I love my server.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by MDDad » Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:41 pm

Wabash wrote:How do you know this FOIA is more important than others?
Jesus, Wabash, this request could potentially derail the campaign of the heavy favorite to gain the White House in November if it shows malfeasance, conflicts of interest, or lapses in ethics. And such a derailment could impact the makeup up the Supreme Court for the next 20 or 30 years. I doubt 22,000, or 2,200, or even 22 of the other FOIA requests carry that kind of potential impact. If you used one ounce of common sense instead of snapping to your usual position of partisan bias, you’d realize these are things we should know before we make our presidential choice. Only a blind acolyte would want to cover up or delay this kind of information.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by MDDad » Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:50 pm

Wabash wrote:You should just concede the Clintons are that much smarter than anyone you support.
For a couple of career politicians as intelligent and savvy as the Clintons, they make some of the stupidest personal decisions in recent history.

If you serve on a jury, and you or a family member speaks with a family member of the parties to the litigation, all hell can break loose. Yet here we have a former President of the United States meeting privately with the Attorney General who is investigating his wife while the FBI keeps all reporters and photographers away from the meeting. It is truly beyond stupid.

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by sbayhills » Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:54 pm

You should just concede the Clintons are that much smarter than anyone you support.
I'll concede they're smart, as well as slicker, and know how to push things to the limit. I can't believe that Clinton would do something that he knows won't look good. Since we both concede he is smart, what's his end game on this move?

User avatar
Parrotpaul
Posts: 33550
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:14 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Parrotpaul » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:08 pm

I'm reasonably sure someone will commission an investigation that will cost millions and prove nothing. Relax and enjoy the show in the mean time....celebrate 'Merica's birthday.
"I think I may say that of all the men we meet with, nine parts of ten are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by their education." John Locke

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by sbayhills » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:11 pm

Same to you Paul.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Wabash » Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:08 pm

Parrotpaul wrote:I'm reasonably sure someone will commission an investigation that will cost millions and prove nothing. Relax and enjoy the show in the mean time....celebrate 'Merica's birthday.
Count on that. The GOP has made a lot of lawyers wealthy and started cottage industries with bogus Clinton investigations. The satirist Andy Borowitz had a great post before Boehner resigned.
Republicans Promise Smooth Transition of Hate from Obama to Clinton

WASHINGTON - Republicans today promised that there will be a "seamless transition of hatred" if President Obama is succeeded in office by Hillary Clinton. "Like many Americans, we will be saddened to see our lawsuits, investigations, and general harassment directed towards President Obama come to an end," said House Speaker John Boehner. "But we want to reassure everyone that we are very much up to the challenge of transferring our hatred to a President Clinton." Boehner promised the American people that the tormenting of the new Democratic President would begin on her first day in office. "The fact that we began this process while she was still Secretary of State will really enable us to hit the ground running," he said.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
Parrotpaul
Posts: 33550
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:14 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Parrotpaul » Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:18 pm

I'm thinking Hillary might actually just want to disown, Bill...or kick him in the cute little bunny rabbit. WTF was he thinking?
"I think I may say that of all the men we meet with, nine parts of ten are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by their education." John Locke

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Luca » Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:40 pm

Maybe the point has been made previously, but I don't have the time to read through this entire thread. I find it pretty discouraging that the issue has come down to whether or not a Secretary of State" knowingly" sent classified information over a private email server.

To me it doesn't make much difference whether she sent classified information or not. I don't doubt that she did and I don't doubt that it was hacked by God knows how many foreign countries at God knows what cost. To me the issue is that an American Secretary of State would dare to set up his or her own private email server and conduct US government business in such a way that she alone has access to these publicly owned records and the ability to deny access to whomever he or she wants. That is unprecedented. That alone is scandalous and should be the issue. Nobody has been this brazen before, it is clearly illegal/unethical and it's perfectly obvious why she did it.

I'm not naïve enough to believe that there is not already corruption in the federal government, but if there are no appropriate legal consequences to this flagrant disregard to both law and common sense then it will be an indication to me that the corruption is much deeper than I had believed..............................Luca

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Wabash » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:59 am

Luca, the only reason conservatives care about this issue is fourfold.

1. It involves a Clinton.
2. It involves a Clinton running for president.
3. It involves a Clinton running for president during an election year.
4. It involves a Clinton running for president during an election year running against an incredibly weak GOP opponent.

Your claim that this practice is unprecedented is not supported by facts. Former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, had a similar arrangement. As did the Bush Administration with a RNC server that was used by senior White House officials. During testimony on this issue a former White House official estimated presidential advisor, Karl Rove, used RNC hosted addresses for 95% of his email. Do you also don't doubt that it was hacked by God knows how many foreign countries at God knows what cost? Is it also scandalous and should have been an issue? This type of brazen behavior has happened before HRC was SecState. Was it clearly illegal/unethical and it's perfectly obvious why they did it? Or should we no longer care because that is the past? Your naïve statement is what is most curious given the ability to easily counter.

As is their custom when it involves one of their own, conservatives looked the other way. One would be naïve to believe that the practice wasn't known by any GOP officials. And not one call from any GOP official demanding appropriate legal consequences to this flagrant disregard to both law and common sense. Which according you is an indication that corruption is much deeper than you had believed..............................Wabash
Last edited by Wabash on Sat Jul 02, 2016 6:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 12550
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Vilepagan » Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:19 am

sbayhills wrote:Why don't you search out before you make another ridiculous comment.
I did do a search, and found no news articles that mentioned any "hopping mad" democrats...why did you not cite your source when you made the ridiculous comment?
Here's a comment from...
I see your problem. You are conflating "comments" made by people into "facts". When the Clintons are actually accused or better yet charged with a crime, then you'll have something...right now your collected "comments" are unimpressive and unconvincing.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

User avatar
sbayhills
Posts: 6887
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by sbayhills » Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:42 am

You're still full of it VP. If you haven't seen all of the articles and comments denouncing the lack of ethics and common sense involved in this matter then you're obviously got your head buried in the sand. Grow up and admit you're wrong for a change. Geez.............

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 12550
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Vilepagan » Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:43 am

Luca wrote:To me it doesn't make much difference whether she sent classified information or not. I don't doubt that she did and I don't doubt that it was hacked by God knows how many foreign countries at God knows what cost.
You don't care whether she's actually guilty, but you're pretty sure she is. Well, you'll forgive me if I don't decide on who to vote for based on your keen insight and understanding of our criminal justice system. I certainly expected more from a man of your intelligence.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19742
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by John Q. Public » Sat Jul 02, 2016 6:36 am

Luca wrote:To me it doesn't make much difference whether she sent classified information or not. I don't doubt that she did and I don't doubt that it was hacked by God knows how many foreign countries at God knows what cost. To me the issue is that an American Secretary of State would dare to set up his or her own private email server and conduct US government business in such a way that she alone has access to these publicly owned records and the ability to deny access to whomever he or she wants. That is unprecedented. That alone is scandalous and should be the issue. Nobody has been this brazen before, it is clearly illegal/unethical and it's perfectly obvious why she did it.
The only difference between Hillary's case and what "everybody else" had also done is that she used a private server and the others had used Hotmail, AOL, Time Warner or whoever their accounts were with. Their servers are probably no more or less secure than hers was and they aren't required to keep backups longer than 6 months. The only thing "unprecedented" there is that it was a private server vs. a corporately owned - and shared - one.

Yes, she should have been going through government servers (which are also under constant attack), just like many of us should only be doing company email through our company servers (and often don't), but considering that "everybody else" had done something similar, her actions were stupid, irresponsible and self-centered but hardly criminal. Unless you want to prosecute all of the others, too. ...IMHO.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by MDDad » Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:25 am

JQP wrote:The only difference between Hillary's case and what "everybody else" had also done is that she used a private server and the others had used Hotmail, AOL, Time Warner or whoever their accounts were with...The only thing "unprecedented" there is that it was a private server vs. a corporately owned - and shared - one.
I realize the devil is in the details, but that “only difference”, and that only “unprecedented” thing, is a huge one. What she did greatly increased her assurance of personal secrecy and personal access control.
JQP wrote:…considering that "everybody else" had done something similar, her actions were stupid, irresponsible and self-centered but hardly criminal.
“Everybody else” did not remotely do something similar.

I agree that her actions were stupid, irresponsible and self-centered. To those of us who value character, integrity and common sense in our presidential candidates, those shortcomings are almost as damning as illegal behavior. If this were an isolated case, it wouldn’t be so concerning. But for decades, Bill and Hillary have shown a blatant disregard for ethical behavior, moral behavior, policy and common sense when it concerns opportunities to indulge themselves.

I’ve asked it a couple times before without an adequate answer, so I’ll ask it again: Given the added burden of maintaining and securing one’s own private server, what possible advantages are there to having one, other than to ensure the highest possible level of personal secrecy and access control.
JQP wrote:Unless you want to prosecute all of the others, too.
To me, it’s not a matter of prosecution. It’s a matter of what we look for in a presidential candidate. And for me, other than intelligence, she ain’t got any of it.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Wabash » Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:46 am

I realize the devil is in the details, but that “only difference”, and that only “unprecedented” thing, is a huge one. What she did greatly increased her assurance of personal secrecy and personal access control.
What is the "huge" difference between her using a private server and other high ranking members of the Bush administration using private email accounts through corporate servers?
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19742
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by John Q. Public » Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:18 am

MDDad wrote:To those of us who value character, integrity and common sense in our presidential candidates, those shortcomings are almost as damning as illegal behavior.
Voting Peace and Freedom this year, are we? :wink:
I’ve asked it a couple times before without an adequate answer, so I’ll ask it again: Given the added burden of maintaining and securing one’s own private server, what possible advantages are there to having one, other than to ensure the highest possible level of personal secrecy and access control.
It's easier. I don't know about government email, but corporate email can be a pain.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by MDDad » Sat Jul 02, 2016 2:12 pm

How is it easier? For many years I sent and received business emails to and from government agencies and large corporations all over the world. It wasn’t one bit more difficult than emailing my sons on my Yahoo account.

And on the off chance that it was easier, doesn’t that once again reinforce the notion that The Sun Queen feels she’s entitled to more ease and convenience than the rest of the human rabble who have to use the government server? It’s so typically Clintonian that it’s almost laughable.

User avatar
Parrotpaul
Posts: 33550
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:14 pm

Re: Lynch shields Clinton Foundation

Post by Parrotpaul » Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:49 pm

How many of you good folks believe the visit was something HRC and Bill cooked up in advance? How many believe Bill was acting on his own, and Hillary knew very little about it until after the fact? Other postulations?
"I think I may say that of all the men we meet with, nine parts of ten are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by their education." John Locke

Post Reply