Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 22, 2015, 08:11:48 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
86224 Posts in 2275 Topics by 1068 Members
Latest Member: cdenny
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] Print
Author Topic: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history  (Read 71681 times)
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #550 on: May 09, 2015, 09:49:39 AM »

 By
Peggy Noonan
May 7, 2015 5:48 p.m. ET
1035 COMMENTS

I have read the Peter Schweizer book “ Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.” It is something. Because it is heavily researched and reported and soberly analyzed, it is a highly effective takedown. Because its tone is modest—Mr. Schweizer doesn’t pretend to more than he has, or take wild interpretive leaps—it is believable.

By the end I was certain of two things. A formal investigation, from Congress or the Justice Department, is needed to determine if Hillary Clinton’s State Department functioned, at least to some degree and in some cases, as a pay-for-play operation and whether the Clinton Foundation has functioned, at least in part, as a kind of high-class philanthropic slush fund.

I wonder if any aspirant for the presidency except Hillary Clinton could survive such a book. I suspect she can because the Clintons are unique in the annals of American politics: They are protected from charges of corruption by their reputation for corruption. It’s not news anymore. They’re like . . . Bonnie and Clyde go on a spree, hold up a bunch of banks, it causes a sensation, there’s a trial, and they’re acquitted. They walk out of the courthouse, get in a car, rob a bank, get hauled in, complain they’re being picked on—“Why are you always following us?”—and again, not guilty. They rob the next bank and no one cares. “That’s just Bonnie and Clyde doing what Bonnie and Clyde do. No one else cares, why should I?”

Mr. Schweizer announces upfront that he cannot prove wrongdoing, only patterns of behavior. There is no memo that says, “To all staff: If we deal this week with any issues regarding Country A, I want you to know country A just gave my husband $750,000 for a speech, so give them what they want.” Even if Mrs. Clinton hadn’t destroyed her emails, no such memo would be found. (Though patterns, dates and dynamics might be discerned.)

Mr. Schweizer writes of “the flow of tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation . . . from foreign governments, corporations, and financiers.” It is illegal for foreign nationals to give to U.S. political campaigns, but foreign money, given as donations to the Clinton Foundation or speaking fees, comes in huge amounts: “No one has even come close in recent years to enriching themselves on the scale of the Clintons while they or a spouse continued to serve in public office.” The speaking fees Bill commands are “enormous and unprecedented,” as high as $750,000 a speech. On occasion they have been paid by nations or entities that had “matters of importance sitting on Hillary’s desk” when she was at State.

From 2001 through 2012 Bill collected $105.5 million for speeches and raised hundreds of millions for the foundation. When she was nominated, Hillary said she saw no conflict. President Obama pressed for a memorandum of understanding in which the Clintons would agree to submit speeches to State’s ethics office, disclose the names of major donors to the foundation, and seek administration approval before accepting direct contributions to the foundation from foreign governments. The Clintons accepted the agreement and violated it “almost immediately.” Revealingly, they amassed wealth primarily by operating “at the fringes of the developed world.” Their “most lucrative transactions” did not involve countries like Germany and Britain, where modern ethical rules and procedures are in force, but emerging nations, where regulations are lax.

How did it work? “Bill flew around the world making speeches and burnishing his reputation as a global humanitarian and wise man. Very often on these trips he was accompanied by ‘close friends’ or associates who happened to have business interests pending in these countries.” Introductions were made, conversations had. “Meanwhile, bureaucratic or legislative obstacles were mysteriously cleared or approvals granted within the purview of his wife, the powerful senator or secretary of state.”

Mr. Schweizer tells a story with national-security implications. Kazakhstan has rich uranium deposits, coveted by those who’d make or sell nuclear reactors or bombs. In 2006 Bill Clinton meets publicly and privately with Kazakhstan’s dictator, an unsavory character in need of respectability. Bill brings along a friend, a Canadian mining tycoon named Frank Giustra. Mr. Giustra wanted some mines. Then the deal was held up. A Kazakh official later said Sen. Clinton became involved. Mr. Giustra got what he wanted.

Soon after, he gave the Clinton Foundation $31.3 million. A year later Mr. Giustra’s company merged with a South African concern called Uranium One. Shareholders later wrote millions of dollars in checks to the Clinton Foundation. Mr. Giustra announced a commitment of $100 million to a joint venture, the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative.

It doesn’t end there. When Hillary was secretary of state, Russia moved for a bigger piece of the world uranium market. The Russians wanted to acquire Uranium One, which had significant holdings in the U.S. That meant the acquisition would require federal approval. Many had reservations: Would Russian control of so much U.S. uranium be in America’s interests? The State Department was among the agencies that had to sign off. Money from interested parties rolled into the foundation. The deal was approved. The result? “Half of projected American uranium production” was “transferred to a private company controlled” by Russia, which soon owned it outright.

What would a man like Vladimir Putin think when he finds out he can work the U.S. system like this? He’d think it deeply decadent. He’d think it weak. Is that why he laughs when we lecture him on morals?

Mr. Schweizer offers a tough view of the Clinton Foundation itself. It is not a “traditional charity,” in that there is a problem “delineating where the Clinton political machines and moneymaking ventures end and where their charity begins.” The causes it promotes—preventing obesity, alleviating AIDS suffering—are worthy, and it does some good, but mostly it functions as a middleman. The foundation’s website shows the Clintons holding sick children in Africa, but unlike Doctors Without Borders and Samaritan’s Purse, the foundation does “little hands-on humanitarian work.” It employs longtime Clinton associates and aides, providing jobs “to those who served the Clintons when in power and who may serve them again.” The Better Business Bureau in 2013 said it failed to meet minimum standards of accountability and transparency. Mr. Schweizer notes that “at least four Clinton Foundation trustees have either been charged or convicted of financial crimes including bribery and fraud.”

There’s more. Mrs. Clinton has yet to address any of it.

If the book is true—if it’s half-true—it is a dirty story.

It would be good if the public, the Democratic Party and the Washington political class would register some horror, or at least dismay.

I write on the eve of the 70th anniversary of V-E Day, May 8, 1945. America had just saved the world. The leaders of the world respected us—a great people led by tough men. What do they think now? Scary to think, isn’t it?



 


Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #551 on: May 11, 2015, 08:24:51 AM »

The heavyset 60-year-old man who walked with a cane seemed an unlikely speaker at the glamorous launch party for a cosmetics company held in Santa Monica, Calif., in March.

But Tony Rodham appeared at ease among the special guests and well-heeled investors, offering them encouragement as well as an invitation.

“If there’s anything I can ever do for any of you, let me know,” Mr. Rodham said. “I’ll be more than happy to do it.”

A promotional video of the party that the cosmetics company later released identified the speaker as “the youngest brother of former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton,” a relationship that has been Mr. Rodham’s calling card since the days of the Clinton White House.


On and off for two decades, the affable Mr. Rodham has tried to use his connections with his sister and his brother-in-law, former President Bill Clinton, to further a business career that has seen more failures than successes. The connections to the Clintons have given Mr. Rodham, a self-described “facilitator,” a unique appeal and a range of opportunities, like addressing Chinese investor conferences and joining an advisory board of a company seeking permission to mine for gold in Haiti.

But his business dealings have often invited public scrutiny and uncomfortable questions for the Clintons as Mr. Rodham has cycled through a variety of ventures, leveraging his ties to them and sometimes directly seeking their help.

When Mr. Clinton worked as a co-chairman of Haiti’s earthquake recovery commission, Mr. Rodham and his partners sought a $22 million deal to rebuild homes in the country. In court proceedings three years ago in an unrelated lawsuit, Mr. Rodham explained how “a guy in Haiti” had “donated” 10,000 acres of land to him and described how he had leaned on Mr. Clinton to get the rebuilding project funded amid bureaucratic delays.

“I deal through the Clinton Foundation. That gets me in touch with the Haitian officials,” Mr. Rodham said, according to a transcript of his testimony. “I hound my brother-in-law, because it’s his fund that we’re going to get our money from. And he can’t do it until the Haitian government does it.

“And he keeps telling me, ‘Oh, it’s going to happen tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow.’ Well, tomorrow hasn’t come yet.”

Mr. Rodham’s Haiti project never did happen. The Clinton Foundation said in a statement that it was not aware of Mr. Rodham’s Haiti project and had no involvement in it. Mr. Clinton’s office said he had not been involved in any of Mr. Rodham’s pursuits in Haiti.

But Mr. Rodham was able to prevail on the former president for help in other ways.

When Mr. Rodham was short on cash in 2010, Mr. Clinton helped get him a job for $72,000 a year raising investments in GreenTech Automotive, an electric car company then owned by Terry McAuliffe, an old friend of Mr. Clinton’s and now the governor of Virginia.

“I was complaining to my brother-in-law I didn’t have any money. And he asked McAuliffe to give me a job,” Mr. Rodham said during the court proceedings, which were the result of a lawsuit over unpaid legal bills filed by his lawyer in a child support case.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

A brother down on his luck seeking help from more successful siblings is a familiar story, and presidents and their families have hardly been immune from that sometimes uncomfortable situation. For the Clintons, Tony Rodham has not been the only source of embarrassment.

Mrs. Clinton’s other brother, Hugh Rodham, stumbled through an unsuccessful campaign for the Senate in Florida during Mr. Clinton’s first term. Roger Clinton, the former president’s brother, served a year in federal prison on a cocaine distribution charge. And all three were involved in lobbying Mr. Clinton for pardons for their associates as he left office, prompting a congressional inquiry.

“They’re all colorful,” Rahm Emanuel, a former Clinton aide who later became mayor of Chicago, said in an interview in 2001. “They’re all living large.”

As Mrs. Clinton began her 2016 campaign for the presidency, Hugh Rodham and Roger Clinton had faded from public view, but Tony Rodham emerged as a controversial figure. A government investigation in March found that GreenTech, which sought green cards for its Chinese investors through an American government program, had received special treatment in the handling of its visa applications. The report described instances when Mr. McAuliffe and Mr. Rodham contacted an official from the Department of Homeland Security to complain about the pace of the visa process.

Mr. Rodham’s unsuccessful pursuit of housing contracts in Haiti, which has not previously been reported, raised new questions.

As Mrs. Clinton campaigns, she speaks fondly of her brothers. At a stop in Iowa, she recalled them working together at her father’s drapery business. Her official campaign biography prominently mentions them.

“She loves her family more than anything,” said Nick Merrill, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton. “Her brothers have always been there for her, and she will always be there for them. Each, though, have their own lives, their own jobs, their own ups and downs.”
Continue reading the main story

    Poll Shows Lack of Excitement Over Presidential Hopefuls 09:00 AM ET
    Today in Politics: Trade Fight Intensifies as Vote Looms 06:51 AM ET
    Rand Paul Plays Down Comments on Military Exercise After Mockery 3:31 PM ET

As the youngest of three children, Tony Rodham has lived in the shadow of his sister. He never finished college, and he worked at a variety of jobs — as a prison guard, private detective and at the Democratic National Committee — until after the Clintons were in the White House, when he became a consultant and deal broker. He was once married to Nicole Boxer, the daughter of Senator Barbara Boxer of California.

He lives with his second wife, Megan, and two young children in a large house on a hill in Vienna, Va., a suburb of Washington. He declined to speak to a reporter who went to his door one afternoon in April, and he did not respond to other messages seeking comment for this article.

But in a statement from Mr. Rodham passed on by the Clinton campaign, he said that he wanted to protect his family’s privacy and that he would not engage in disputing claims about him, which he said he considered to be political attacks.

His wife said the family was excited about Mrs. Clinton’s campaign for president.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

“The kids love their Aunt Hillary,” she said. “We are supportive, and we are excited.”

Mr. Rodham described his dire financial situation during the court proceedings in 2012. As a result of a series of failed business deals — including some in oil and gas, water, housing, tutoring and pharmaceuticals — he said he had not made a mortgage payment in 10 months and was fighting home foreclosure.

The Clintons, he said, had been generous, even paying for his son’s schooling, but they were not going to give him more money. “Hillary and Bill are done,” he said. “I mean, look at what they’ve done for me. They’ve given me money all the time.”

Mr. Clinton’s willingness to assist in getting him work with Mr. McAuliffe was helpful, Mr. Rodham said, but at $6,000 a month, it was not enough. “It’s kind of like the job he got me a long time ago when I worked in the prison,” he said.

Even more important, according to Mr. Rodham, was what he said was going to be Mr. Clinton’s help on his Haiti rebuilding project. That project came about when Sheldon Drobny, an old friend, contacted Mr. Rodham about making a connection for a Chicago-area contractor, who wanted to become involved in building houses in Haiti.

“We were trying to help. Period,” Mr. Drobny, a co-founder of Air America Radio, the former liberal talk network, said in a phone interview. He called the effort “humanitarian.”

Mr. Drobny said he had connected with Mr. Rodham because of what he believed were his ties to the Clinton Foundation, which was playing a central role in the rebuilding efforts. Ultimately, he said, nothing happened “because the Haiti government was not cooperative.”

The Clinton Foundation said in its statement that aside from supporting a housing exposition in Haiti, it had not been directly involved with any housing projects. The foundation also said Mr. Rodham’s project had not been among the more than 300 submitted for consideration at the expo.

Mr. Rodham projected that he could make $1 million on the Haiti deal if it came to pass — enough money, he said in his court testimony, to take his family to Disney World and cover his debts, including his legal bills and his long overdue federal taxes.

Mr. Rodham eventually settled his bill with his former lawyer, Gwendolyn Jo M. Carlberg. Ms. Carlberg said in a phone interview that, despite her lawsuit, she did not have a negative view of Mr. Rodham. “I found a lot of good in Tony,” she said.

He is still sought after for deals and personal appearances.

That was the case in March when Mr. Rodham attended the celebration of Wynn Beauty & Health in Santa Monica, which included a performance from an “American Idol” contestant. In addition to appearing in the promotional video, Mr. Rodham posed for at least a dozen photos.

But after a reporter contacted Wynn Beauty & Health, Mr. Rodham was removed from the video and photos of him disappeared from the company’s Facebook page. In an email, the company said that Mr. Rodham was not involved in the business and that he had appeared at the celebration only as a longtime friend offering congratulations.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6466


« Reply #552 on: May 12, 2015, 11:11:31 AM »

Has everyone seen the Hillary Clinton Air Fresheners that are hung out as signs to greet her?

These apparently help with the stench of corruption that accompany her visits.

http://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/admin/ed-assets/2015/05/Hillary-LA-4-copy.jpg?zoom=1.5&resize=480%2C600

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/05/a-warm-welcome-for-hillary-in-la.php
___________________________________________

Hillary has taken no questions from the press in 21 days?  I am not trying escape my bet loss with ccp but this is hardly what we used to call running for President.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #553 on: May 12, 2015, 12:48:51 PM »

She is waiting for the various scandals to age out so she can deflect questions about them as old news.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #554 on: May 13, 2015, 12:16:17 AM »

The banks are too big to fail.  Hillary is too big to jail.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6466


« Reply #555 on: May 14, 2015, 04:39:01 PM »

May I please recommend that anyone/everyone that would like to be informed on this subject take the time and listen to this commercial-free radio-like interview.  

If a liberal tells you that there's nothing there, nothing wrong, not a shred of evidence as they are trained to say, you should be able to refute that with concise facts and make the case that this nothing short of corruption.

For the commodities scandal, the soundbite I took from it is that mathematically there is a one in 34 trillion chance her gains happened on her own as she alleged.  What is the simplest, most persuasive story within Clinton Cash that demonstrates this to be influence peddling at the highest level?

THE POWER LINE SHOW, EPISODE 16: CLINTON CASH, WITH PETER SCHWEIZER

Podcast is down the page at this link:  http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/05/the-power-line-show-episode-16-clinton-cash-with-peter-schweizer-2.php

https://ricochet.com/podcasts/the-stories-inside-clinton-cash/
http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/cdn.ricochet.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Powerline_Ep15.mp3

Powerline's John Hinderaker starts the interview saying:  "I read Clinton Cash cover to cover this afternoon and my conclusion is that the Clintons are a criminal syndicate."

Schweitzer tells how he reached out to journalists at the NY Times, Washington Post, ABC News to follow his trail, verify his facts and help bring this story out with the release of this book.

The first 36 minutes are the interview and the rest is other discussion.





« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 04:53:04 PM by DougMacG » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #556 on: May 15, 2015, 11:53:14 AM »

Listening to it now; I've posted it on my FB page.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #557 on: May 15, 2015, 03:38:02 PM »

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/05/hillary-wants-the-power-to-ban-books-and-movies-that-criticize-her.php

Beneath her.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #558 on: May 16, 2015, 12:47:14 PM »

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/16/8614881/Hillary-Clinton-took-money
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #559 on: May 17, 2015, 11:39:12 AM »


http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/#.VVKoBUZWlFo.facebook

 angry
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6466


« Reply #560 on: May 19, 2015, 12:34:53 PM »

(From Benghazi)
A smoking gun about what we already know happened.

Nonetheless 45% of the country will ignore this:  So she lied.   So what.........  they all do.......  just right wing loons making a stink over a non scandal.......
                  we just need to know the real Hillary.....  what a really nice person she is.......
              yadda yadda.
Two decades of Democrats ignoring sliminess.   Only worse now.   Not better.   

You're about right with that 45% number, about the number who allegedly still approve of Obama now despite all that has happened.  Still, they have to hold their nose with that support.  General polls don't tell is how many will turn out.  Obama won at the level of his poll numbers with magical (or criminal) turnout.  How excited are young people about HRC, running on a platform of more of the same, while home ownership hits a quarter century low and college grads live unemployed in their parents' home.  How excited are blacks and other minorities to see an old, white, privileged woman win the Presidency?

The only excitement comes from a shot at getting some of her big campaign money to come your way.  That, too, only goes to the powerful and connected.

What they have left is the usual fear factor - the scary Republicans are going to take away all your free stuff.  That message has been losing lately in 70% of the state legislative chambers.

The table is set for a Republican with charisma and skill to inspire people to do better than this.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6466


« Reply #561 on: May 19, 2015, 12:57:43 PM »

http://www.vox.com/2015/4/28/8501643/Clinton-foundation-donors-State

181 Clinton Foundation donors who lobbied the State Department WHEN HILLARY RAN THE PLACE.

Liberal source.  Read the list.

"Not a shred of evidence"
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #562 on: May 19, 2015, 08:37:43 PM »

Why Was The Clinton Foundation Paying Sidney Blumenthal While Hillary Was Secretary Of State?
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on TheHillaryDaily.com on May 19, 2015
Foundation Claims Hillary Hitman Helped Plan "Commemorative Events"
The New York Times reported that Hillary Clinton received more than thirty detailed "intelligence briefings" from long-time Clinton lieutenant Sidney Blumenthal about Libya and Syria while she was Secretary of State. The memos did not disclose Blumenthal's business ties to parties in Libya.

While a casual reader might have laughed at them, Hillary circulated the memos to her top staff and even asked for comments.

And, at the same time that he was churning out the "intelligence reports" to Hillary, Blumenthal was being paid by the Clinton Foundation. For what?

A Clinton Foundation spokesman told the Times that "Blumenthal would help with research, "message guidance" and the planning of commemorative events, according to foundation officials."

Oh, right, Sidney was an event planner? Are they kidding? What did he do -- look for the caterers and decide on the font size for the invitations? And, by the way, the only "commemorative event" on the Foundation schedule was the "10th Anniversary of the Clinton Library" which was celebrated on November 14, 2014. So it's doubtful that he was working on the hors d'oeuvres three years earlier. No, he was doing something else.

As for research, the Clinton Foundation employs thousands of people who are familiar with their programs and really didn't need Sidney's talents. His forte is negative research, character assassination, hit jobs to destroy any Clinton opponents.

As for "message guidance," whose message are we talking about here? Hillary's or the Foundation's?

So what was he doing for the Foundation? Did Hillary use the "charitable" Clinton Foundation to pay for advice to her? Political advice? And did she pay Sidney for the "intelligence reports" through the Foundation?

And maybe for advice on how to finesse the Benghazi mess after she left the State Department?

What's going on here?

Blumenthal has always been one of Hillary's closest confidants feeding her innate paranoia. It was Sidney who originated Hillary's favorite phrase "the vast right wing conspiracy." During the impeachment process he was also the source of a false media campaign (at Hillary's behest) accusing Monica Lewinsky of being a "stalker" of an innocent President who was only trying to "minister" to her. That earned him big points with Hillary.

Sidney is no foreign policy expert. He has absolutely no experience in that realm. And, the White House had refused to allow Hillary to hire him.

So why did Hillary get the Foundation to hire Blumenthal? Was she using the Foundation as her secret political arm - putting Blumenthal on the payroll to advise her on her presidential campaign and on how to spin Benghazi? Was that part of a pattern?

Remember that Huma Abedin was also paid by the Foundation while she worked at the State Department and at Teneo. Was anyone else?

With Hillary in hiding and the Foundation in panic mode, we're not likely to see answers anytime soon.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #563 on: May 19, 2015, 08:41:37 PM »

second post
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33262


« Reply #564 on: May 20, 2015, 07:00:48 PM »

Blame Hillary For Email Delay
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on TheHillaryDaily.com on May 19, 2015
Hillary Deliberately Caused Delay Of Email Release By Submitting Only Paper Copies
Hillary Clinton ended her 37-day boycott of the press today when she spent a few minutes claiming she wants her emails released by the State Department ASAP.

But here's the thing: the only reason that there's been such a long delay is that Hillary deliberately delivered the 550,000 emails in hard copies, instead of in electronic files.

Why does that make a difference?

Because that meant every single one of the 550,000 pages has to be manually scanned. And, to make it even harder, Hillary made sure that some of the documents were copies on both sides. That took 5 weeks of 12 people working full time to complete.

And Hillary knew that would create just one more obstacle and cause an enormous delay.

She also knew that the paper files couldn't be searched like electronic files. And she didn't want to make it easy to connect the dots.

So her fervent wish for the release of the documents is as phone as her claims that she did nothing wrong when she set up her home-brew server and use it for her official State Department documents.

She thinks we are all stupid and that we don't get it. But we do: Hillary set up her home server to circumvent the Freedom of Information Act, she did just that, and once caught, she wiped her server clean and got rid of everything she didn't want us to see.

We get it Hillary.
The 2016 Buzz -- All The Latest News on the Candidates and Issues. 

Click Here to view the 2016 Buzz!
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6466


« Reply #565 on: May 21, 2015, 10:18:25 AM »

"... the only reason that there's been such a long delay is that Hillary deliberately delivered the 550,000 emails in hard copies, instead of in electronic ... She knew that the paper files couldn't be searched like electronic files. ...
She thinks we are all stupid and that we don't get it. But we do: Hillary set up her home server to circumvent the Freedom of Information Act, she did just that, and once caught, she wiped her server clean and got rid of everything she didn't want us to see."
[/quote]

Too bad to live in a world where Dick Morris can make this most obvious observation that none of the so-called mainstream networks or newspapers can. 

Rush L had a long montage of msm reporting on how Hillary finally answered questions.

No she didn't.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4461


« Reply #566 on: May 21, 2015, 11:59:50 AM »

"Rush L had a long montage of msm reporting on how Hillary finally answered questions"

I heard part of it too.

She spoke and her supporters in the media had a crumb with which they could say,  "see she answered all questions" without adding now we can move on with a sigh of relief.

She's their girl.   That's it.   Nothing else will matter.   Interesting the Mika on Morning Joe said that Republicans will not vote for a less than conservative candidate while liberals will vote for one who (pretends) to be too far to the right.

While some Repubs will stay home as I might the libs will vote for their gal no matter what.

Some of the Dems interviewed state how the "alleged" email or Benghazi scandal sort of bothers them there are simply more important things going on.   First they absolutely hate to criticize her for any reason then rationalize even in the face of the obvious that it just isn't important enough.   It is always the big government crowd too.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!