Author Topic: Is Hillary Hiding Something  (Read 118447 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #25 on: March 10, 2015, 01:55:50 PM »
The Campaign Spot Election-driven news and views . . . by Jim Geraghty. The First Two Lies from Hillary’s Press Conference Share article on Facebookshare Tweet articletweet Plus one article on Google Plus+1 Print Article Email article Adjust font size AA AA AA AA AA AA AA by Jim Geraghty March 10, 2015 3:49 PM All over Twitter you can find negative reactions to Hillary Clinton’s just-concluded press conference. To me, the most important part of her press conference was her statement that was an obvious, flat-out lie: She said the e-mail server was initially set up for use by former president Bill Clinton. Hillary Clinton insisted that there were “numerous safeguards” in place, adding there were “no security breaches.” One hacker broke into Hillary’s account in 2013 and leaked several messages to Kremlin-funded RT. Beyond that example, if her server is being privately managed, there’s no way for, say, State Department security professionals or the NSA or CIA or any other intelligence agencies to know if there was a security breach. Can we agree that the woman who said she couldn’t carry two phones because it would be too inconvenient is in no position to assess cyber-security? Also, Hillary kept insisting that federal government workers get to decide what e-mails are considered “private” and which ones are work-related, and that doesn’t sound right at all. On CNN a few moments ago, Margaret Hoover, a former employee of the Bush White House and Department of Homeland Security, said that wasn’t true. Finally, while her wording was not terribly clear, it appears she kept half her e-mails from her time as Secretary of State as “private” and either deleted them or believes she has a right to delete them. In short, disastrous.

 Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/415188/first-two-lies-hillarys-press-conference-jim-geraghty?fb_action_ids=10206502044176656&fb_action_types=og.shares&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B915769361778942%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.shares%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #26 on: March 10, 2015, 02:21:39 PM »

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #27 on: March 10, 2015, 03:42:46 PM »
It may be legal but is it ethical?


I think this is somewhat along the issue, IMO.

Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice both did the same thing, without outcry.  And when it's not called out on either side, it just emboldens each side to continue on.

Each side is so intent on claiming they've done no wrong, that they miss the bigger picture of whether or not the action itself is right or wrong, regardless of political affiliation.  Not letting the other side 'have one up' is what's important, not whether or not something is truly right or wrong.

Hell, look at Blacken's and Vince's responses.  Rather than discussing the ethical implications of whether or not what they did was wrong - be it Clinton, Rice, Powell, or any other - they just wanna act like kids (nah, nah...you've got nothing on her, Repubs suck, etc.).

The discussion should really be (from both sides), this may have been an accepted past practice, but it's wrong and needs to be stopped.  Or, perhaps an argument for why it should continue.

Alas, that would require an adult conversation...


blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #28 on: March 10, 2015, 03:50:10 PM »
just calling them out they seem to think this is the first time this has happened,it's been going on since the internet but when Clinton does it it's a big crime,or could it be because she's the front runner :o

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #29 on: March 10, 2015, 04:31:22 PM »

I think this is somewhat along the issue, IMO.

Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice both did the same thing, without outcry. 


I don't think they ran all of their email from a private server.  At least not Colin Powell.  Not sure about Rice. 

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40791
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #30 on: March 10, 2015, 10:41:54 PM »
Even if I wanted to take the conservative side on issues such as this one, I'd eventually have difficulty with this. The reason for that is because some of you conservatives go completely overboard with your theories and accusations. It is as if you really fear liberals are out to get you personally.

I have not followed this whole email scandal with Hillary Clinton. It could be something big or it could just be another trumped up piece of shit to discredit a politician. Republicans are certainly not immune to this type of scrutiny either.

Both Republican and Democratic politicians have done some really dumb and occasionally despicably dishonest shit. It all boils down the to fact, in my opinion, that most politicians are more interested in getting elected or staying in office then they are in representing their constituency. In other words, Republican or Democrat, many are just a bunch of charlatans.  This is what we should be talking about.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #31 on: March 11, 2015, 04:10:29 AM »
Its the double standards



Even if I wanted to take the conservative side on issues such as this one, I'd eventually have difficulty with this. The reason for that is because some of you conservatives go completely overboard with your theories and accusations. It is as if you really fear liberals are out to get you personally.

I have not followed this whole email scandal with Hillary Clinton. It could be something big or it could just be another trumped up piece of shit to discredit a politician. Republicans are certainly not immune to this type of scrutiny either.

Both Republican and Democratic politicians have done some really dumb and occasionally despicably dishonest shit. It all boils down the to fact, in my opinion, that most politicians are more interested in getting elected or staying in office then they are in representing their constituency. In other words, Republican or Democrat, many are just a bunch of charlatans.  This is what we should be talking about.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #32 on: March 11, 2015, 06:35:50 AM »

Breitbart London
Breitbart Texas
Breitbart California
   




AP Fact-Check: Hillary’s Email Excuses Don’t Hold Water






2124






7



444

   
AP Photo/Seth Wenig
AP Photo/Seth Wenig

by Breitbart News10 Mar 2015564























































             
           
           
           




















WASHINGTON (AP) — How Hillary Rodham Clinton’s statements about her exclusive use of private email instead of a government account as secretary of state compare with the known facts:

CLINTON: “Others had done it.”

THE FACTS: Although email practices varied among her predecessors, Clinton is the only secretary of state known to have conducted all official unclassified government business on a private email address. Years earlier, when emailing was not the ubiquitous practice it is now among high officials, Colin Powell used both a government and a private account. It’s a striking departure from the norm for top officials to rely exclusively on private email for official business.



CLINTON: “I fully complied with every rule I was governed by.”

THE FACTS: At the very least, Clinton appears to have violated what the White House has called “very specific guidance” that officials should use government email to conduct business.

Clinton provided no details about whether she had initially consulted with the department or other government officials before using the private email system. She did not answer several questions about whether she sought any clearances before she began relying exclusively on private emails for government business.

Federal officials are allowed to communicate on private email and are generally allowed to conduct government business in those exchanges, but that ability is constrained, both by federal regulations and by their supervisors.

Federal law during Clinton’s tenure called for the archiving of such private email records when used for government work, but did not set out clear rules or punishments for violations until rules were tightened in November. In 2011, when Clinton was secretary, a cable from her office sent to all employees advised them to avoid conducting any official business on their private email accounts because of targeting by unspecified “online adversaries.”



CLINTON: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

THE FACTS: The assertion fits with the facts as known but skirts the issue of exchanging information in a private account that, while falling below the level of classified, is still sensitive.

The State Department and other national security agencies have specified rules for the handling of such sensitive material, which could affect national security, diplomatic and privacy concerns, and may include material such as personnel, medical and law enforcement data. In reviewing the 30,000 emails she turned over to the State Department, officials are looking for any security lapses concerning sensitive but unclassified material that may have been disclosed.



CLINTON: “It had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches.”

THE FACTS: While Clinton’s server was physically guarded by the Secret Service, she provided no evidence it hadn’t been compromised by hackers or foreign adversaries. She also didn’t detail who administered the email system, if it received appropriate software security updates, or if it was monitored routinely for unauthorized access.

Clinton also didn’t answer whether the homebrew computer system on her property had the same level of safeguards provided at professional data facilities, such as regulated temperatures, offsite backups, generators in case of power outages and fire-suppression systems. It was unclear what, if any, encryption software Clinton’s server may have used to communicate with U.S. government email accounts.

Recent high-profile breaches, including at Sony Pictures Entertainment, have raised scrutiny on how well corporations and private individuals protect their computer networks from attack.



CLINTON: “When I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two. Looking back, it would’ve been better if I’d simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn’t seem like an issue.”

THE FACTS: If multiple devices were an inconvenience in the past, they may be something of an obsession now. Clinton told an event in California’s Silicon Valley last month that she has an iPad, a mini-iPad, an iPhone and a BlackBerry. “I’m like two steps short of a hoarder,” she said. She suggested she started out in Washington with a BlackBerry but her devices grew in number.

Smartphones were capable of multiple emails when she became secretary; it’s not clear whether the particular phone she used then was permitted to do so under State Department rules.

 
Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism, 2016 Presidential Race, Hillary Clinton

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #33 on: March 11, 2015, 06:43:33 AM »
Fact: what she did was not illegal,that we know is a fact

Fact: repubs are scared shitless of running against Hillary

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #34 on: March 11, 2015, 07:48:58 AM »
fact...yeah it was
fact...Hilary is imploding
L

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #35 on: March 11, 2015, 07:55:35 AM »
"DELETER of the Free World".

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #36 on: March 11, 2015, 08:00:20 AM »
fact...yeah it was
fact...Hilary is imploding

lol you saying it doesn't make it so,better go get some more rush talking points :D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #37 on: March 11, 2015, 08:02:01 AM »
I love libfags defending this bitch

Was on the board of Walmart

Voted for Iraq war

Took TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS from middle east human rights abusers while SOS

Is the pic of wall street bankers

Monica / Paula Jones / Kathleen Willey / Juanita Broderick / Jennifer flowers etc  

Rose Law Firm billing records lies

Benghazi lies

Health Care summit lies and lack on transparency

Carpet Bagging the NYS Senate seat and doing nothing

Stealing the WH china and selling the Lincoln bedroom, etc.  


and now this.



L M F A O!!!!!!

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #38 on: March 11, 2015, 08:03:05 AM »
fact...yeah it was
fact...Hilary is imploding
Darrell Issa (R), Hillary's chief nemesis, admits her private email use was not a crime.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #40 on: March 11, 2015, 08:14:42 AM »
Benghazi

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #41 on: March 11, 2015, 10:22:51 AM »
AP sues State over Clinton emails
By Brian Stelter, Host
Wed March 11, 2015

New York (CNN)The Associated Press filed a lawsuit against the State Department on Wednesday to obtain email correspondence from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State.

The AP said it had been trying to pry the emails out of the government agency through Freedom of Information Act requests for several years. The requests "have gone unfulfilled," the news wire service said.

The lawsuit -- filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia -- said the State Department "should be compelled to abide by the law, perform reasonable searches and promptly release all of the requested records."

Report: Clinton State Department one of least transparent agencies

The suit comes amid widespread media coverage of Clinton's private email server, and one week after the news wire said it was considering legal action to force the release of her emails.

"After careful deliberation and exhausting our other options, The Associated Press is taking the necessary legal steps to gain access to these important documents," Karen Kaiser, the general counsel for the Associated Press, said in a statement.

Kaiser said the suit is important because Clinton is a "presumptive 2016 presidential candidate" and because she was Secretary of State "during some of the most significant issues of our time."

"The press is a proxy for the people, and AP will continue its pursuit of vital information that's in the public interest through this action and future open records requests," Kaiser said.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/11/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-ap-sues-state-department/index.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #42 on: March 11, 2015, 12:56:55 PM »
3 troubling theories about what could have been going on inside Hillary's emails


 

 


Colin Campbell
 
 

 
34 minutes ago
   93
 
 
 
 facebook


 linkedin


 twitter


 email


 print

   



AP354487645528 (1)AP/Richard DrewHillary Clinton answers questions at a news conference at the United Nations.
   

See Also


 


Someone inside the White House just gave Hillary Clinton's media strategy a brutal review

 


Why did Hillary Clinton delete about 30,000 emails?

 


Hillary Clinton: 'It would have been better' if I used official email


Hillary Clinton's Tuesday press conference did little to quell concerns about her exclusive use of personal emails as secretary of state

Clinton, the Democratic front-runner for president in 2016, repeatedly insisted she elected not to use government email out of "convenience." At the same time, she said she deleted about 30,000 "private, personal" emails that her lawyer deemed not relevant to her government position.

She described the tens of thousands of deleted messages as "emails about planning Chelsea's wedding or my mother's funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends, as well as yoga routines, family vacations."

But many substantive questions remain about Clinton's email use and conduct after she left the administration, according to Republicans, editorial boards, and others.

Poor security harming National Security

Many experts said Clinton's personal email server was less secure than an official government one. Accordingly, they argue, Clinton could have left classified material vulnerable to hackers looking to undermine the White House or obtain crucial national security information.

Clinton dismissed these concerns during her press conference. She said she used a secure server set up for her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and it was guarded by the Secret Service. She said there was no evidence of a security breach. And Clinton claimed she never used her email to send classified material in the first place.

But those statements didn't satisfy a number of experts and critics.

“To say it wasn’t compromised is to say, ‘I don’t know it was compromised," Stewart Baker, who served as General Counsel to the National Security Agency (NSA) under George W. Bush, told Politico. “It would be pretty easy for a nation-state to compromise that account, and pretty easy to hide the fact that they had compromised that account.”

hillary clintonREUTERS/Mike Segar Clinton speaks during a news conference at the United Nations headquarters in New York March 10, 2015.


Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), a likely 2016 presidential candidate, scoffed at Clinton's claims during a Fox News interview Tuesday night. Paul said he would "guarantee" that sensitive material ended up in Clinton's inbox.

"I don't think convenience should trump national security," Paul said. "Even her conversations about things could be classified. She wants us to believe, 'Well, I didn't transmit classified documents.' But I guarantee that if you [file] a Freedom of Information Act and you want to know about Hillary Clinton's or the secretary of state's conversations with the president, my guess is you'll get back a notice saying it's classified."

The Washington Post's editorial board echoed this sentiment.

"Clinton said she did not discuss classified material in e-mail, but surely her days and messages were taken up with 'sensitive but unclassified' matters that would be of interest to snoopers," the paper opined Tuesday. "She didn’t address that security issue, nor did she say anything about whether the State Department had security concerns about her private arrangement."

The New York Times reported Wednesday that security and government experts remain skeptical of Clinton's claim about classified information. A former senior State Department estimated as much as 50% of Clinton's daily workload would have been on classified material.

"I would assume that more than 50 percent of what the secretary of state dealt with was classified," the anonymous official said of Clinton. "Was every single email of the secretary of state completely unclassified? Maybe, but it’s hard to imagine."

Hidden info about the deadly Benghazi attack

AP300273704997AP/Ibrahim AlaguriGlass, debris and overturned furniture are strewn inside a room in the gutted US consulate after the Benghazi attack.

Perhaps there's no greater point of controversy during Clinton's tenure as secretary of state than the 2012 attack on a diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya. Four Americans died in the attack, including US Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Partially because the federal government abruptly shifted its narrative of the incident — from a spontaneous protest to a planned terrorist attack — a number of conspiracy theories have emerged. Many people believe the Obama administration knowingly handed out false information or was involved in a cover-up of the attack.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-South Carolina), who is leading the House's Benghazi investigation, told Fox News on Tuesday that he was completely unsatisfied with Clinton's press conference and will call her before his committee to answer additional questions.

"I have no interest in her yoga routine. Trust me, I have no interest in that," Gowdy said. "But I have every interest in public record, whether it's related to Libya or not. And I no interest in her personal attorney determining what is a public record and what is not a public record. That should be done by a neutral, detached person."

The House Intelligence Committee concluded last year that there was no evidence of "deliberate wrongdoing" on the part of the Obama administration. However, questions remain about the CIA's role at the Benghazi site and how the State Department contributed.

"The U.S. effort in Benghazi was at its heart a CIA operation, according to officials briefed on the intelligence," The Wall Street Journal reported at the time. "Of the more than 30 American officials evacuated from Benghazi following the deadly assault, only seven worked for the State Department. Nearly all the rest worked for the CIA, under diplomatic cover, which was a principal purpose of the consulate, these officials said."

'Follow the foundation money'

GettyImages_456049370Mic hael Loccisano/GettyHillary Clinton speaking at her foundation's annual meeting at the Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers on September 24, 2014 in New York City.

National Journal columnist Ron Fournier speculated this week that Clinton's "private" email stash could contain messages relating to the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, which has reportedly collected $2 billion from sources that include oppressive foreign governments and corporations.

"The emails are a related but secondary scandal," a Clinton source told Fournier. "Follow the foundation money."

While she served as secretary of state, the Clinton foundation struck a deal with the White House to limit foreign contributions to the organization. However, the foundation broke that agreement in 2010 when it accepted $500,000 from Algeria, which was actively lobbying the State Department over its human rights issues at the time.

After Clinton left the State Department in 2013 and began preparing for a presidential campaign, the foundation raised eyebrows by accepting contributions that would have been forbidden when she was at the State Department.

The Canadian government agency lobbying for the construction of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to the foundation in 2014. Clinton says she's undecided on the measure, which is only being blocked by the current president's veto pin. Fournier suggested this kind of apparent conflict of interest could be what Clinton is interested in shielding from public disclosure.

"Is the foundation clean? Is it corrupt? Or is the truth in the muddy middle, where we so often find the Clintons? Due to the fact that Hillary Clinton chose to skirt federal regulations and house her State Department emails on an off-the-books server, even the most loyal Democrat can't honestly answer those questions," Fournier said. "Could that be why she hasn't coughed up the server?"

Michael B. Kelley contributed to this report.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/3-troubling-hillarys-email-theories-2015-3#ixzz3U6oCo5fl

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #43 on: March 12, 2015, 11:01:29 AM »
All those folks immediately absolving her from breaking the law may have jumped the gun. 

Ex-DOJ lawyer says form could hold answer to whether Clinton broke law with emails
Published March 12, 2015
FoxNews.com

A former Justice Department lawyer says Hillary Clinton, despite her claims that she broke no rules or laws, may have committed a violation in leaving the State Department without turning over all official emails and records.

Shannen Coffin, a senior lawyer under the George W. Bush administration, pointed to a "separation" form that he said officials are supposed to sign upon leaving the department.

His argument: If she signed the form, she probably gave a false statement and broke the law; if she didn't, she ran afoul of department policy.

The form -- OF109 -- certifies that the person who signs it has turned over all "classified or administratively controlled" materials, as well as all "unclassified documents and papers" relating to official government business.

It's unclear whether Clinton indeed signed that document. But Coffin told Fox News, "If that's the case, there's no question [she broke the law]."

"Making a false statement in this context,  knowingly and willfully -- which I can't imagine anything more knowing and willful than knowing you have 55,000 records sitting in your home -- if you do that, it is a felony," he told Fox News' "The Kelly File."

The form cites "criminal penalties" for knowingly falsifying or concealing information.

"Every employee at the State Department has to sign this little piece of paper when they leave," Coffin said. And if Clinton did not sign that document, he added, "why not?"

His questions challenge statements Clinton made two days ago during a press conference in New York City, where she repeatedly said she followed the rules in using a personal email account. Specifically, she said the "laws and regulations" at the time allowed her to use it.   

"I fully complied with every rule that I was governed by," she said.

Coffin said "it's demonstrably not true" that she did so. Part of Clinton's argument has been that she turned over 55,000 pages of documents in late 2014 after she was asked by the department for them. But Coffin said the rules call for departing officials to let records officials check through their files when they leave, "most definitely not two years later."

Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, asked on Thursday about Coffin's claims, declined to say whether he thinks she broke the law.

"I'm not comfortable trying and convicting Secretary Clinton in the media without knowing what all the facts are," the former Bush administration official said.

But he said what he's seen is "very troubling."

He said that when he left the Justice Department, he too had to sign a form acknowledging he turned over the necessary documents.

"Hillary Clinton has been in government long enough to understand that would be standard procedure," Gonzales told Fox News.   

Coffin first raised questions about whether Clinton signed the form in a column for National Review, where he is a contributing editor.

In the column, he wrote: "Mrs. Clinton plainly did not just remove personal e-mails without clearing that removal with records officials; she also did not even return official records. Her defense now is that returning the documents two years later is good enough. But the same records manual emphatically rebuts that post-hoc justification."

As for the certification form, he wrote: "It seems that the one document in all of this that we need to see, if it exists, is Hillary Clinton's Form OF-109."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/12/ex-doj-lawyer-says-clinton-may-have-broken-law-with-emails-cites-separation/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #44 on: March 12, 2015, 11:02:40 AM »
The comedian makes a good point.

Jon Stewart Ain't Buying Hillary's Characteristic E-Mail Dissembling
By Jack Coleman | March 12, 2015

It's one thing to mock the presumptive Democrat nominee for president a year and a half from the election. Let's see where the left's leading court jester stands when it actually matters.

Still, it is surely worrisome to Hillary Clinton's apologists that Jon Stewart is among her growing legion of skeptics after Clinton's attempt to clear the air about her private email account for official business while secretary of state made the issue even cloudier.

On Comedy Central's Daily Show last night, Stewart played clips from Clinton's press conference at the United Nations, interspersed with his snarky commentary. Included was Clinton's dubious claim that she used a single handheld device while secretary of state for the sake of "convenience," rather than one for personal correspondence, a second for those government-related --

STEWART: Two problems with this answer -- first, since Clinton left the State Department, her single-device preference has completely gone away.

CLINTON (shown at Silicon Valley Conference for Women on Feb. 24): I have a, you know, an iPad, a mini-iPad, an iPhone and a Blackberry.

STEWART (picking up the thread): A Sidekick, a Veta, a Zune, Nintendo Power Glove, uh, can with two strings, fax machine, Tamagotchi, and a burner phone, I just snap that in half and toss it into the Chesapeake. Oh! I've said too much! And second, you are a person that wants to be president -- which is a super-inconvenient job. Did you know that everywhere you go, you not only have to carry a phone but a briefcase filled with nuclear codes? So you can't suddenly go, oh, briefcase kind of a hassle to carry, can I just put the codes on my phone? Because then halfway through your term you butt dial a nuclear strike on Mexico.

Look, here's the thing -- the rule exists so that the government can automatically archive all your work emails -- but since you did it your own way, your work emails are all mixed up with your personal emails, and now they have to be separated out. Let me guess who you chose to handle that delicate job --

CLINTON (at UN presser): What did was to direct, you know, my counsel to conduct a thorough investigation ... I, uh, am very, uh, confident of the process that we conducted. ... I have, uh, no doubt that we've done exactly what we should have done.

STEWART: And I have no doubt that you have no doubt. And maybe you did hand over everything you were supposed to. But when we all agree to do things a certain way, and you do it in a different way, it looks weird.

Stewart then compared what Clinton did to the person who initially agrees to separate recyclables, then doesn't follow through, a joke that fell flat. Clinton directing her "counsel" (uh, lawyer) to conduct a "thorough" investigation (following specific parameters that she established), along with her annoying use of the royal "we", made for more inviting targets.

After this brief detour, Stewart zeroed in again where Clinton is vulnerable --

STEWART: So just for funsies, why don't you let somebody who doesn't work for you look through those personal emails just to see if you missed anything?

ABC NEWS REPORTER JONATHAN KARL (shown in previous news report): Clinton said that after she went and organized her emails, determining which ones were official business to be sent over to the State Department and which ones were personal, that she deleted about 30,000 emails that she determined to be purely personal.

Stewart, looking dumbfounded, mutters a profanity. Then over to the alleged rationale from Clinton at her UN press conference --

CLINTON: I didn't, uh, see any reason to keep them.

STEWART: Anndd welcome back. You just told us you didn't follow the rules because having two separate email addresses would be way too big a pain in the ass. But you know what is a far bigger pain in the ass? Trying to delete 30,000 emails.

You may recall that Clinton made a chummy appearance on The Daily Show last summer, schmoozing with Stewart during her lackluster book tour. Will Clinton return before he leaves the program at a still-unspecified date later this year? Stewart may have burned that bridge last night, though he and Clinton could eventually conclude that it serves both their interests for her to disarm him again.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/2015/03/12/jon-stewart-aint-buying-hillarys-characteristic-email-dissembling#sthash.gP6lfe9z.dpuf

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #45 on: March 12, 2015, 11:09:44 AM »
Hillary is hiding an appendage if you ask me.   :D

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #46 on: March 12, 2015, 11:17:38 AM »
Hillary is hiding an appendage if you ask me.   :D

rumor has it she likes to hide it up your ass,could be just a rumor ;D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39483
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #47 on: March 12, 2015, 11:19:49 AM »
rumor has it she likes to hide it up your ass,could be just a rumor ;D

Sorry - I like women w big tits and fat ass.   Hildebeast is a zoo animal that is only attractive to fellow members of the hippopatumas family and the same gender. 

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #48 on: March 12, 2015, 11:22:31 AM »
Sorry - I like women w big tits and fat ass.   Hildebeast is a zoo animal that is only attractive to fellow members of the hippopatumas family and the same gender. 


lol


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Is Hillary Hiding Something
« Reply #49 on: March 13, 2015, 10:49:23 AM »
Funny.   :)