The Clinton method

This is how it works. Clinton lies and gets caught. She denies the charges and her surrogates attack the people who caught Hillary in her deception. When the balance of evidence gets too heavy, she claims to have misspoken and claims that it really doesn’t matter anymore. By the time all the facts come out, Clinton surrogates have fought long and hard to confuse the issue and generally succeeded. Hillary’s lies become the new floor and are now to be ignored by polite journalists.

Here is an article for reference. You can find others.

Hillary clearly broke procedures at State Department. She also showed reckless disregard for our nations secrets. Whether she actually broke any laws is unclear because Hillary can make the laws seem unclear. It is just gaming the system however. She certainly showed no respect for the intent of the law.

She may get away with it. She probably will. The annoying part is that an honest and honorable man - David Petraeus - was dealt a career ending blow for doing something very similar with LESS malicious intent. Her "sharing" with Sidney Blumenthal would certainly qualify, even if we assume benign intent.

Posted by Christine & John at August 12, 2015 3:58 PM
Comment #397347

Hillary, in addition to her many other short-comings is simply not trustworthy enough to be president. Frankly, an oath of office is probably performed by her with her fingers and toes crossed.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 12, 2015 5:07 PM
Comment #397350

I browsed the US espionage act. It appears to me that ignorance, sloppiness, unintentional act or almost any other excuse for revealing American secrets has no defense in court.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 12, 2015 6:12 PM
Comment #397351


Ignorance is a mitigating factor but not an excuse.

Let me make a few more points.

1. You cannot give classified material to anyone w/o a clearance. You do not get to judge whether it is “really” important or not.

2. You cannot remove classified material from a safe area w/o specific safeguards. You cannot decide if you think your own safeguards are sufficient.

3. You cannot give classified material even to someone with clearance outside specific circumstances.

It is very hard to believe that Hillary did NOT do anything that violated her security clearance. Whether what she did was against the law is harder to know, since Clintons are good at obfuscating.

Posted by: C&J at August 12, 2015 6:35 PM
Comment #397352

All Department of State employees are required to be familiar with the requirements of Executive Order 12731, “Principles of Ethical Conduct for
Government Officers and Employees” plus 5 CFR 2635 regarding standards of ethical conduct for employees of executive branch agencies. All employees must be aware that they are responsible not only for avoiding wrongdoing but also for avoiding the appearance of wrongdoing.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 12, 2015 6:48 PM
Comment #397354

I just heard that President Jimmy Carter has cancer.

My prayers are with him and his family in this time of great stress.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 12, 2015 7:01 PM
Comment #397358

Breaking news on Fox, evidently the FBI has had HRC’s server for about a week. It is now a fact she had top secret emails on the unsecured server. Judge Napolitano said Hillary’s legal problems are worse than “grave”. The report is that someone in her office changed the top secret identities on her emails. The judge said once the questioning begins, people will be ratting each other out to cover their own backsides.

Posted by: Blaine at August 12, 2015 9:47 PM
Comment #397360

Think about what you are doing with HRC.

Accusations are being made with no attributed sources. There have been no concrete revelations of wrongdoing, no evidence, no indictments, no trials, no convictions. Nothing. And just what do you think will actually be revealed by the FBI or a House Committee? Do you think HRC is sending classified information to foreign governments?

Meanwhile, why do you think no one is showing up for GOP presidential candidate rallies? Bernie Sanders drew 70,000 people in just three days. HRC has consistently outdrawn GOP candidates too.

You see, this is the basic problem with spending all your time on tearing others down. You imagine it will build up your own candidates. You imagine it will help your own causes. It will not.

Instead, the pervasive atmosphere of negativity and attack has left the GOP bereft of ideas and unable to generate any enthusiasm among voters. Virtually everything idea involves cutting, bombing, banning, cutting, reducing, defunding, and other negatives. It’s bad for the country and it’s bad for you. And if you’re not sure, look at what is happening with your presidential candidates.

No one is showing up for their rallies. A reality tv star, Donald Trump, lead the polls with no apparent platform. Jeb Bush is talking about Iraq and the whole country is collectively cringing. Doctor Ben Carson has compared America under Obama to Nazi Germany, and Obamacare to slavery. He is a black man, and yet he actually said that. I am not making that up! CEO Carly Fiorina cut 30,000 jobs at HP while tripling her own pay. When the Board finally fired her, the stock price jumped 7%; that is, the value of the company increased by $3 billion the day she was fired. The other candidates are so ineffectual they rarely register in double digits in polls.

Do you really think what you are doing is working? Really?

Do you really think this approach will win an election next year?

Posted by: phx8 at August 13, 2015 12:46 AM
Comment #397364


Speaking about her security violations, I am morally certain that she violated security procedures, since it is a violation to have a secure document in your possession anywhere outside an officially secure environment or w/o an officially secure procedure. A private server is - by the definition of the law - unsecured. The intent of the person breaking the security rule is a mitigating factor in punishment, but it is not an excuse for the violation.

I once got a violation because someone had used a classified document as a bookmark in a book I lend them. I subsequently put it back on my shelf in an unsecured environment and when it was discovered I got the violation.

Hillary clearly played fast and loose with those regulations. You need not know any details about what she intended to know this. The only mitigating factor would be what to do about it.

Her only honest recourse would be to admit that she broke the rules and claim ignorance in order to get leniency. It is possible and likely that her supporters will forgive her transgressions, but she did transgress.

I am obviously not Hillary supporter. But my annoyance with her behavior her is unrelated to my politics. I dislike the arrogance of dilettantes put in charge of serious affairs. Some political appointees rise to the occasion and do their jobs with great distinction. Some of the best officials I have known have been political appointees, who brought great outside experience. But there are others who view their appointment as their own property and/or a stepping stone to something else.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 7:22 AM
Comment #397369

Well it would appear that our conservative/Republican cohorts here at WB are once again being suckered into wasting their time on the Clinton punching bag of politics. A quick review:

Travelgate,Hillarycare secrecy,Whitewater,Filegate,Rose Law firm,Pay to play,Lincoln bedroom,Monica Lewinsky,Pardongate,Benghazzi,Email server,Clinton foundation.

With the exception of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which cost the taxpayers over 60 million dollars to reveal that Bill Clinton likes women and philanders and will lie to keep his wife from finding out, duh!!, there hasn’t been anything notable, criminal or illegal discovered.

So yes keep punching on the Clinton punching bag, we all know you will do this to the detriment of the issues and ideas that you should be devoting time to because you just can’t help yourselves. Soon, just as before, you will be tired of all the punching and start to address the issues but by that time HRC will be out in front of all of that and the American electorate will once again see that when it comes to the Clinton punching bag conservatives and Republicans just get themselves all worked up over nothing. The Clinton’s play all of you like fiddles once again. But we shall see if this plays out as it has in the past, I am not privy to inside information and only wait like everyone else for the inevitable nothing.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 9:43 AM
Comment #397370
Think about what you are doing with HRC.

Accusations are being made with no attributed sources. There have been no concrete revelations of wrongdoing, no evidence, no indictments, no trials, no convictions. Nothing. And just what do you think will actually be revealed by the FBI or a House Committee? Do you think HRC is sending classified information to foreign governments

It’s not a question of whether she sent classified information to foreign governments. You’re trying to shift the subject. She HAD classified documents on her private server, this is a crime. Either she knew it was classified; or someone working for her stripped the classification from the documents before sending them to her server, this is also a crime. The right is doing nothing to Hillary; she did it to herself. It is Hillary who chose to use a private server with a lame excuse, and it is Hillary who chose to drip-drip-drip Friday document dumps and refuse to turn over her emails and server. It was Hillary who used a lawyer who did not have a security clearance to determine which emails were classified and which weren’t. The Teflon covering that Bill Clinton experienced is fading away for Hillary. People liked Bill, but they don’t like Hillary.

Here is a good article in The Hill:

“I’m not sure they completely understand the credibility they are losing, by the second,” said one Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “At some point this goes from being something you can rationalize away to something that becomes political cancer. And we are getting pretty close to the cancer stage, because this is starting to get ridiculous.”

“Look, this is a classic example of the cover-up being ten times worse than the so-called crime — though in this case there wasn’t a crime,” said another progressive strategist.

“The culture of secrecy that has surrounded the Clintons — understandably in some cases — has now yielded a situation where she did something that wasn’t necessary and looks nefarious…”

Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic strategist who has worked with Clinton in the past but is not doing so in this campaign, argued that the general suspicion that the former secretary of State is concealing something is much more damaging than the specifics of the email matter.

“It’s hard to imagine Americans in the heartland wondering about whether Hillary Clinton gave up an email server or not,” he said. “But [it adds to] this constant battering she’s taking, which is that people don’t trust her. It increases the feeling that something is not being told to them.”

Joe Trippi, who served as campaign manager for Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential bid, concurred.

“The thing that’s hurt has been losing the ground she’s lost on trustworthiness and honesty. It’s on trust, not on the specifics of emails or anything like that,” he said…

The PPP poll showed 52 percent of Iowans holding an unfavorable view of Clinton and only 38 percent holding a favorable view. In a Quinnipiac University poll released at the end of last month, a clear majority of voters nationwide said they did not consider the former secretary of State honest or trustworthy — 57 percent to 37 percent. It was only the latest finding that indicated deep trouble for Clinton on that issue.

Still, Clinton’s most adamant supporters insist she has done nothing wrong.

“Everybody is just looking for a ‘gotcha’ moment,” said long-time Clinton loyalist Lanny Davis. “They’re ignoring what the inspector general said, which is that there was not one single accusation of wrongdoing alleged against Hillary Clinton and her use of email.”

The Clinton campaign and its allies are also pushing back hard at their critics. The campaign’s communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, sent a mass email to supporters Wednesday, warning that “you might hear some news over the next few days about Hillary Clinton’s emails.”

The Palmieri email went on to assert that there was “a lot of misinformation” around the issue, that “Hillary has remained absolutely committed to cooperating” and that “this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president.”

Separately, Media Matters for America — the liberal watchdog group founded by Clinton ally David Brock — sent out a statement under the subject-line “Myths and Facts about Hillary Clinton’s email.” The first fact it listed was that “none of the emails sent to Clinton were labeled as classified or top secret.”

So what you are claiming is nothing more than the Clinton talking points; but it’s not true. The emails have been found to be classified as top secret. Hillary has carefully worded her comments with statements like “none of the emails I sent or received were classified as top secret at the time I sent or received them”; well that could be technically true if one of her people remove the classification at the time they were sent or received, which is what happened. But, it doesn’t change the fact that she had classified material on her private server…a crime.

The article claims the Clinton camp is in panic mode and it’s true.

Charles Chamberlain, executive director of the progressive Democracy for America, said that liberals believe Republicans are amplifying the issue. Still, he argued that Sanders appears to be exciting the Democratic base more than Clinton.

Sure they will, just like the left would do if the shoe was on the other foot. It’s amazing that the left cries foul when Republicans use the same tactics that Democrats have used for years.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 9:47 AM
Comment #397371

When asked about the EMAIL SERVER SCANDAL!! Bernie Sanders was quoted as saying, “I like Hillary Clinton, I respect Hillary Clinton, I differ on issues with Hillary Clinton and that is what I look forward to challenging her on.”

He is not a Republican obviously, not only because he is a declared Independent but also because he won’t take his turn at the Clinton punching bag. He’s a good politician that wants to discuss the issues and the differences he has with her.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 9:57 AM
Comment #397372

speaks; it wasn’t about Bill Clinton trying to hide a sexual encounter from his wife. Bill Clinton has been cheating on Hillary since they got married, and she has known it. What got Bill Clinton in trouble and eventually impeached was “LYING UNDER OATH”. I know this don’t mean anything to the left, but it is a violation of the law. And it will be the same thing that takes Hillary down; she was able to weasel around signing documents when she took office and left office as SOS, but Judicial Watch used the courts to force her to sign a court document stating that she had not received of sent classified material via her private server. That remains to be the question. The question now remains, will the Obama DOJ or FBI try to cover for her, or will they throw her under the bus? It depends on the relationship between the Obama’s and the Clintons. What do you think???

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 9:59 AM
Comment #397373

We could go back in the archives of Watchblog to the beginning and find examples of the left attacking Republican or conservative candidates, not on the issues, but rather personal attacks. The tactic of the left has always been personal attacks. If evidence is presented against Obama or Hillary on WB, the first response from the left is to attack the source rather than deal with the issue. This is just the way the left works, it’s part of the playbook.

So now, when Hillary has put herself in a dire position (by her own actions), the Republicans are now evil for using Democratic tactics. Only in the mind of a liberal..

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 10:09 AM
Comment #397377

So the worst case scenario is that the legal private e-mail server of the Secretary of State contained at least 55,000 e-mails, and some of the e-mails that should not have been sent to it? Really? There is no evidence, but best case, that is the sum of the attacks? I see.

As Speak noted in a previous comment, there has been a long list of fake scandals ginned up the GOP to attack the Clintons as well as Obama. As a result, the GOP has lost the popular vote in 5/6 past presidential elections. By votes, 20 million more Americans voted for Democratic Senators than Republican ones. The House is much closer, but would have been Democratic in the previous session of Congress without gerrymandering.

So you guys want to keep up the attacks on HRC? You think this is a good idea. Look at the quote from Sanders again:

“I like Hillary Clinton, I respect Hillary Clinton, I differ on issues with Hillary Clinton and that is what I look forward to challenging her on.”

Yet he is running against her, and a poll show he actually passed her in NH. Yeah, I know, it’s early, but there it is. He is attracting huge crowds, 70,000 in just three days.

The GOP is not attracting crowds at all. The campaign against HRC is relentlessly negative.

Conservative columnist George Will just called the leading Republican presidential candidate, Donald Trump, “vulgar” among other things. Getting to this point was no coincidence. Conservatives have embraced Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, and others. Conservatives have supported Sarah Palin. Conservatives have stood by while all kinds of outrageous statements have been made- Birtherism, Obamacare is worse than slavery, comparing a nuclear non-proliferation treaty to marching Israelis to the ovens, and so on.

Now, here you are. Do you really think this approach is working? Look at the approach taken by Sanders. Forget the specific issues. Just look at his approach. Then, look at the approach of the Republican candidates. Compare them. Which approach works better? Which approach makes for a better campaign, a better party, a better country?

Posted by: phx8 at August 13, 2015 11:45 AM
Comment #397378

Phx8, the worst case scenario is that restricted sensitive government information was on an unsecured server.

The only outrageous statements being made are from those of you willing to ignore a breach in national security and are trying to make this about Hillary.

There is no way in the world that you can honestly say this is no big deal and that there is no need for appropriate measures to be taken to ensure it doesn’t happen again.

Posted by: kctim at August 13, 2015 12:28 PM
Comment #397379

kctim, could you imagine if it were say Dick Chaney who had used a email server in his house and had used it for classified documents? Would we be listening to the left try to sweep it under the rug? There were actually millions of emails and the FBI chose to take a 40 email sample and out of the 40 they found 4 that were possibly classified. 2 are definitely top secret and the other 2 are being determined if the security classification had been removed. Which would also be a felony. The left is always about emotions; touchy-feely; if breaking the law results in a better world, then by all means, break the law. They can’t compute law breaking, it’s not in their vocabulary.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 1:08 PM
Comment #397380

” Do you think HRC is sending classified information to foreign governments?”

It makes no difference who the recipient was; a violation of the espionage act is serious. An FBI criminal investigation is serious. Serious politicians should discuss serious allegations against a potential president.

And…serious democrats should be concerned that the truth and all the information related to HC and her emails be revealed as soon as possible. It is in their vested interest.

Should she win the party nomination and it then is revealed that she violated laws, the party would be in shambles.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 1:23 PM
Comment #397381

IF it had been Cheney, the left would be calling for his head over this.
IF it had been Cheney, C&J’s article would be about Cheney needing to be held responsible for his actions.

Posted by: kctim at August 13, 2015 1:28 PM
Comment #397383

While the leftist on WB and some of the internet radical leftist are trying their best to spin this about personal attacks on HRC; the rest of the Democratic Party is in complete meltdown. Within a couple of weeks we are going to see something big in the Democratic Party. It will be Biden, Gore, Warren, or someone else; but the party will have to find someone to take her place.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 1:55 PM
Comment #397384

Pavlov could have only hoped for such willing participants in his experiments in “classical conditioning” but then he was using dogs and knew well what to expect. Humans with a higher sense of being would be expected to react with reasoning and assumptions that allowed them to not salivate when he entered the room. But here we see evidence of the Pavolovian response live on WB. You all are salivating and slobbering all over each other to solidify your need to punch the Clinton work out bag.

No one I have observed is calling anyone evil, trying to quash the investigation or even showing mild support for HRC other than to say, let’s see what the investigation brings. No one is comparing her to anyone else and calling foul. No one is attacking anyone for talking about it. The only comment I made was to point out the prior futile attempts that have been made to “dig up the dirt on HRC”.

Now I can understand why Pavlov’s dogs salivated when he entered the room because they knew they could anticipate being fed. What I don’t understand is how conservatives and Republicans can be fed the information that “we got her this time” and then start salivating and slobbering. Doesn’t this seem odd even to you hounds of everything bad about the Clintons? Shouldn’t you wait for the real dish rather than the hint of something?

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 2:20 PM
Comment #397385

Shouldn’t you wait for the real dish rather than the hint of something?
Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 2:20 PM

I would agree Speak if there was only a “hint”. An FBI criminal investigation qualifies as more.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 2:28 PM
Comment #397388
What I don’t understand is how conservatives and Republicans can be fed the information that “we got her this time” and then start salivating and slobbering.

I personally don’t give a wing-ding about Hillary. Obama has done so much damage to the country, I don’t think any Democrat could win the 2016 presidential election.

Hillary is a disaster waiting to happen. If it wasn’t the emails or the server, it would be something else. She is not liked. She has enemies. She has no friends. Bill could talk his way out of any problem; not so with Hillary. I try to look at the big picture. The DOJ and the FBI are controlled by the Obama administration; why are there leaks about Hillary’s emails coming out of the DOJ and FBI? Who is leaking this information? The only thing on Obama’s mind at this stage of the game is his legacy. The question then becomes; can Hillary protect Obama’s legacy? Does he trust her? I would venture to say there is pure hatred between Obama and Clinton. So why would he even begin to trust her? Obama told Hillary, Sidney Blumenthal was not to be part of her SOS advisers or employees. So what did Hillary do…she used Blumenthal in defiance of Obama.

The litany of your so called false charges against Hillary have a common denominator…emails.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 2:44 PM
Comment #397389

RF, I may not be able to respond much today. This investigation was started at the behest of the Intelligence Community inspector general. The inspector general’s referral was a “counterintelligence referral”, not a “criminal referral”. You guys are so hopped up on this that you are unable to refer to what is going on in any coherent manner. I will say again, I am not privy to any inside information and would like to wait and see what comes of this before passing any judgement on what has happened and what course should be taken. Once the investigation is complete and the dish is served I would expect then that if there is warrant for crimes they will be served however until then I can hold my beliefs that this could all be “much ado about nothing” as we have seen so many times in the past. I can wait, can you control your salivation until then or is that too much to ask?

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 2:46 PM
Comment #397390

The only common denominator is the Pavlovian response that is being exhibited by conservatives and Republicans. Let’s wait and see where the investigation goes and what it is able to determine. Please you all need to take a deep breath and relax. You still will need to get through the Benghazi committee hearings meeting with Hillary in October, we would not like to see CPR having to be conducted just due to your excitement level. This is only beginning but I expect that come January Hillary will be stumping in Iowa like there is no tomorrow. I could be wrong. Could you?

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 2:53 PM
Comment #397391

I can wait, can you control your salivation until then or is that too much to ask?
Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 2:46 PM

No snide remarks required Speak. Can you point to my “salivation”?

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 2:59 PM
Comment #397392

Not to try to distract anyone, as I wouldn’t want to be accused of trying to lay smoke for Hillary.

Just wanted to wish any left handed people on WB a Happy Lefthanders Day.

Did you know 6 out of the last 12 Presidents were left handed?

Less than 10% of women are left handed?

I always tell my wife who is left handed (I am not) “Everyone is born right handed only the truly gifted overcome that”.

My mother taught me which side of the bread is buttered.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:03 PM
Comment #397393

I suspect that Speaks nastiness may be camouflage for fear.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 3:04 PM
Comment #397394

RF, sorry I had the idea that you were a lot more thick skinned than that due to our prior discussions but I am never one to miss out on giving an apology if one is requested. I guess I could ask instead, can you control your excitement at finally seeing HRC getting her just dues until the just dues of her criminality have been issued by the evidence and the investigation? What ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty?

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:07 PM
Comment #397395

Simply derogatory remarks against any opposition; derogatory remarks require no evidence.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 3:08 PM
Comment #397396

RF, no fear here. Nothing to fear. While I may have mildly supported HRC in some previous discussions here I have always maintained that it is a long way until November of 2016 and I have every intention of waiting to see what happens.

Not sure who is being derogatory here other than some commenters that wish to subvert the due process of law and hang Hillary from the highest prior to any legal decision.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:12 PM
Comment #397397

What ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty?
Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:07 PM

It is alive and well and embraced by me. Stop attributing positions to me that I don’t hold. Your Momma would spank you for being baaaad.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 3:13 PM
Comment #397398

“innocent until proven guilty” Hmmmmm…

Does that include the police who are forced to shot black criminals?

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 3:15 PM
Comment #397399

OK, now you guys are all over the place again. Who the heck attributed anything to you RF? I merely asked a question. Wow, you guys are really off the rails on this. I may not be able to respond much at all if this continues. Why on earth would I want to. With all of the pitchforks and torches it’s getting a little bit wacky here.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:18 PM
Comment #397400

I don’t wish to see Hillary hung, in fact I don’t really expect any dirt to stick to her; but what I am interested in is how the voters view her situation. Right now there are increasing number who distrust her, and for good reason.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 3:19 PM
Comment #397401

My mother, I would ask you to refer to her that way and not in the childish way that you did, voted for Obama twice and was an avid supporter of Hillary Clinton’s before she passed on. Please try not to display your ignorance by pointing to it in such a vulgar manner. Oh hell I should know better and she did too, you conservatives and Republicans just can’t help yourselves when it comes to wallowing.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:22 PM
Comment #397402

“I may not be able to respond much at all if this continues.”

What was that about “thin-skinned”.

Writing “Mother spanking” is “vulgar”?

Take your meds Speak.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 3:43 PM
Comment #397403


She did violate security procedures. The fact that four classified documents were found among those she turned over to State Department is proof of that. That is how security works. You do not need to imply intent, although I question that too. She showed reckless disregard for security. Whether or not you consider that problem is an opinion, but the fact is the fact.

Re innocent until proven guilty - that actually is not how security violations work. If you are found with the violation, the presumption is that you are guilty. It is incumbent upon you to demonstrate why you are not guilty. People have lost security clearances for doing much less than Hillary has already done.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 3:45 PM
Comment #397404

Hey C/J, can one be president and not have security clearance?

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 3:47 PM
Comment #397405

Secretary of State Colin Powell had a private e-mail server, just like HRC. Democrats never called for his head or suggested it was unsecured or that he had violated an espionage act.

In general, conservatives are wildly over the top on this. And it isn’t working for you. No one likes conservative presidential candidates any better because of the attacks. It’s so bad, several of the leading GOP candidates are vanity candidates with no political experience.

Trump is the leading vanity candidate, but at least he has the experience of turning a lot of money into a very large amount of money. Unlike other vanity candidates like Carson and Fiorina, Trump succeeded in the world of business and he successfully ran a large organization.

Btw, this may be the day the Carson campaign died. It turns out Carson did medical research on the brain tissue of aborted fetuses. He has said a lot of things recently he should not have said.

Posted by: phx8 at August 13, 2015 3:47 PM
Comment #397406

Re Hillary in the race - I hope she stays in. I think she is beatable. If Jeb Bush is the Republican nominee, facing Hillary will be essential to his victory in order to nullify the “dynasty” claim. The dynasty argument will be used against both Bush and Hillary and so will cancel out only if both are in the race.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 3:48 PM
Comment #397407

Typical phx8…can’t stand the heat; change the subject.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 3:50 PM
Comment #397408

C&J, please do not lecture me about security clearances. My Top Secret clearance was designated far beyond anything issued to low level State Department employees. I will not divulge why. Your limited exposure in the military and State department seems to have given you the unfounded expert ability to discern every breach of security clearance as you would see it. It doesn’t work that way. HRC will be held accountable for anything she did not protect sufficiently that she should have. Until that accountability has been reckoned please use your limited exposure to security clearances to guide you through this process. I am tired of listening to self appointed experts extolling about breaches of security that they know very little about.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 3:57 PM
Comment #397409

What date did democrats find out Secretary of State Colin Powell had an unsecured private e-mail server with classified information on it?

Posted by: kctim at August 13, 2015 3:58 PM
Comment #397410


I will lecture you. If you indeed understand security clearances you are trying hard to deceive. And if you believe what you write, you should have lost your clearance. I suggest you review the procedures. I don’t care why you had the clearance. They are behave in the same way. You are just plain wrong.

Beyond that, security procedures that would get you in trouble with a “mere” top secret document would certainly apply to those at higher levels.

She messed up. And evidently you did too.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 4:06 PM
Comment #397411


BTW - Hillary was an employee of the State Department, so those rules apply to her too.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 4:10 PM
Comment #397412

Aw, come on C&J, I was just starting to feel super duper special about my Top Secret security clearance.


Posted by: kctim at August 13, 2015 4:11 PM
Comment #397413


Powell was trying to drag State Department into the information age. He used email very openly in order to try to get it accepted. Until Powell, few State computers were attached to internet. They could not communicate outside. The world of email at State was very different. By the time Hillary got there, the situation was stabilized. And you are correct, as far as I know, nobody ever found classified documents among Powell’s email and he did not have his own server to hide on.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 4:13 PM
Comment #397414


Lots of people have security clearances and all of them understand that they would get in serious trouble if they behaved like Hillary.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 4:16 PM
Comment #397416

C&J, yes she was a State Department employee but at the highest level clearance necessary for her. You obviously did not receive clearance designation for high level and high objective outcomes or you would know differently. My clearance was and is intact. My debriefing does not allow me to divulge anything other than the known. The FBI investigated and interrogated my family, my friends, my schoolmates, my teachers and anyone that I had contact with. That they knew about that was something during my debriefing that I was informed of and told to expect. Your lecture to me falls on deaf ears since I do not expect that you have any inkling of what you speak of, let alone what Hillary Clinton has been allowed. As I have said in the past, let’s wait until the investigation is conducted and concluded to make our informed decisions. Until then it would seem you are wont to make uninformed speculations. Got it.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 4:25 PM
Comment #397417


No one shares any state secrets with me.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 4:28 PM
Comment #397418

Oh, I know that C&J, I just like the idea that MY top secret clearance was more special and went “far beyond anything issued” to those low level peons.

Posted by: kctim at August 13, 2015 4:28 PM
Comment #397419

LOL…my security clearance is bigger than yours!

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 4:36 PM
Comment #397420


There is no level of clearance that allows you to send documents to an unsecured location or server. The only person exempt from this is the president of the United States. Hillary had classified documents on his unclassified medium.

You claim to have a high clearance. Have you ever sent a classified document to a non-secured location? Would you admit it if you had?

We could trade stories of security clearances, BTW. If you have the higher level clearance, you have already put yourself in jeopardy and should be more careful. If we were speaking in person, and/or if you worked for or with me I might feel constrained to report your activity. You should stop. Now.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 4:39 PM
Comment #397421

C&J,I will say this only one more time. We should all wait for the investigation to be conducted and concluded. That you don’t seem to want to do that would seem to indicate that you have ulterior motives in your quest for what happened. Not interested in a pissing contest. You seem to want to express your ability to discern HRC’s culpability beyond the scope of your knowledge. That I point that out to you should give you pause to reflect. You should stop trying to make it out that you have some information on HRC’s breach of security that others don’t. We all know that you don’t and just have that axe to grind. Let me worry about myself, how about you concern yourself with making speculative accusations based on an uninformed decision making process.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 4:47 PM
Comment #397422


If Hillary has that power, not only unavailable but unknown to the other 99% of people with clearances, she would be wise to say so now and not later.

Re worrying about you - I actually do. We have rules that all should respect - from the lowest guy with a basic clearance to those at the highest levels. We all have an affirmative duty to protect our country’s secrets.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 4:58 PM
Comment #397423

Re having information about Hillary. I have no information about what she did beyond what is in the media. In the media, it has been reported four documents among 40 analyzed should have been classified. There seems to be no dispute about this from the Clinton camp or anybody else. It could be that Hillary was very unlucky with that sample of 40. But no matter, this is all you need know to know that she violated procedure. No inside knowledge is needed beyond publicly available information about how security clearances work.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 5:05 PM
Comment #397424

C&J, then you should assume some guilt for attempting to use your knowledge of clearances to depict HRC as something other than she is. A former Secretary of State that is co-operating with the investigation into her use of emails.

I expect that this will come to very little, aside from more stringent expectations and requirements for government employees and department heads in the communications that they use, as it should, along with the Benghazi committee appearance which I would hope would lead to more dollars being designated to the protection of our diplomatic resources outside of our country. But I as I have said in the past, I could be wrong. Could you? Thanks for worrying about me but I really don’t think it necessary.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 13, 2015 5:07 PM
Comment #397425

To simply sum it up HRC screwed up, how bad she screwed up will come out in the near future. 4 classified docs out of 40 is bad especially when 1 was TOP SECRET.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 13, 2015 5:15 PM
Comment #397426

I don’t know about the rest of you; but it is scary to know the leftist get bigger top security clearances than regular government employees. An then they brag about it on the internet. The only clearance I have is the one that allows me to get my 5th wheel camper in the barn.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 6:02 PM
Comment #397427


Yes, I assume “guilt” by knowing what I am talking about.

Requirements are already stringent. You cannot send classified material to an unsecured destination and a private email cannot be a secure destination by the definition of the law. This would not be a “new” requirement, even if Hillary wants to make it sound like it.

I could not be wrong about this. The fact that such documents were found on her server is a violation. There could be mitigating circumstances about her punishment or she could throw somebody else under the bus, but the die is cast.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 6:24 PM
Comment #397428

ABC News is reporting that Hillary Clinton asked to borrow a book about how to delete e-mails. You’d think this is too farfetched to be true, but it happens on almost every episode of ‘Forensic Files’. Criminals never seem to understand that eventually almost everything they do can (and will be) discovered.

From ABC:

The last batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department included one from Clinton asking to borrow a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe.

Clinton has not said why she requested the book, but it includes some advice that is particularly interesting in light of the controversy over her unconventional email arrangement at the State Department and her decision to delete tens of thousands of emails she deemed to be purely personal.


Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 6:36 PM
Comment #397429

I once asked a police friend of mine, “Are the criminals on the “Cops” show as dumb as they appear to be on TV”. His answer was yes. Could this article from ABC be true? Is Hillary so stupid as to request a book showing her how to delete emails? Watching Hillary is like the movie “Dumb and Dumber”.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 6:41 PM
Comment #397431

If you think about it, Joe Biden is a better choice than Hillary. He will swoop in if Hillary falls to pieces. So the outcome might be good. At least Biden is a pleasant fellow.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 6:49 PM
Comment #397432

Why would the smartest woman on the planet do such a dumb thing? The missing emails were sent to someone and may very well still exist. The recipient(s), could exert great influence on HRC if they contain secret or damning information.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 13, 2015 7:27 PM
Comment #397433

Hillary’s intellect is overestimated. She is an intelligent woman. Had she not married Bill Clinton, she would have been a reasonably successful lawyer. But she is no genius and seems to have a very dangerous streak of paranoia. She shares that flaw with Nixon and if she becomes president we can expect interesting behavior from her.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 7:41 PM
Comment #397434

Stop and think about this for a second. If you were the one scrubbing Hillary’s server, would you make a copy? The very idea of deleting government documents would be enough reason to protect ones butt. When the crap hits the fan, and people are looking at prison time, I would want to be able to cut a deal with the copies.

Posted by: Blaine at August 13, 2015 7:42 PM
Comment #397436


Your not paranoid if someone is really out to get you.

Posted by: Rich at August 13, 2015 7:55 PM
Comment #397437

That’s what Nixon thought. He was right. They were after him, but his actions were largely responsible.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 8:04 PM
Comment #397438

Classification is the responsibility of the originator and I heard on ABC that HRC was one of 20 at DOS with authority to classify. If she was futzing around with improperly classified docs she is in violation of the law.

But,but - - she was a high level cabinet officer in the Exec. and she is no longer a gov’t employee.

A severe violation has taken place but I suspect she will rise above the fray. Like fishing, the big ones usually get away. How about that 20 ft great white? Want to try and stick him in community service??

Now, I’m not alone in my latest conspiracy. Trump has acted more as a liberal til recently. A day before the debate he and Bill had a phone conversation. Many think that Trump knows he is not presidential but has the chutzpa to stand as a 3rd party candidate with the hopes of swinging the election to the Clinton’s.

And, we hear today that Al Gore might be waiting in the wings if HRC falters. IMO, Gore could win against any dem/rep contender active at this time.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at August 13, 2015 8:32 PM
Comment #397440

“Btw, this may be the day the Carson campaign died. It turns out Carson did medical research on the brain tissue of aborted fetuses.”

Are you afraid to put that in quotes. Typical coward. Carson did not say what you posted. Look it up for yourself. I’m not doing your homework for you.

“Doctor Ben Carson has compared America under Obama to Nazi Germany, and Obamacare to slavery. He is a black man, and yet he actually said that”

That sounds like a racist rant to me. So he is a black man. So what? What do you have against black men? I personally am offended by both of those comments. And I am not thin skinned. I will not ask for any apoloby because it would not be hoest of you. Kinda like someone in the Hillary camp.

Posted by: tom humes at August 13, 2015 8:51 PM
Comment #397441

Jesus how many more posts from the conservatives before they mention any type of idea that would be a reason to vote for one of theirs whether it be Kasich or one of the crazies? It seems we are running on empty as a country when the driving political force in this country the past 30 + years is so morally bankrupt that it cannot sell the voters on it’s ideas it can only attack its opponents because they fear the consequences of not doing so.

Where this breaks down for you guys, and where Hillary flips you off when she emerges unscathed, is the problem that no one will believe you. You have cried wolf so many times only the conservative fodder will listen. The hateful and the fearful, or conservatives as we say, will fall for your propaganda but most won’t.

At this point you could show Hillary in a compromising position with little boys and no one would believe you. Yet each and every time some conservative bends and twists the truth to fit his scheme you guys all line up like patsy’s and bellow the conservative talking point/myth/misinformation/half truth/outright lie of the day as if it had merit.

Face it guys despite C&J’s “she’s not brilliant” line she is, on her worse day, better than any of the 17 you have fighting for the chance to run the country into the ground.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 13, 2015 9:46 PM
Comment #397442


If we rated the candidates w/o party, Hillary would be mediocre. I will write more about the better candidates later. Just in general, the clearly better than Hillary groups includes - Bush, Walker, Kasich, Christie, Fiorina & Carson. IMO, even Sanders is better than Clinton. She is just not very good.

The email thing is what I am writing about here. It is amazing that she did what she did. Now we hear that she has turned over a blank server. What an arrogant woman.

The woman just is not that smart. I am smarter than she is. I suspect you are too. W/o her marriage to Bill Clinton, she would have been a reasonably successful lawyer.

Posted by: C&J at August 13, 2015 10:07 PM
Comment #397443

I don’t know if I have ever seen conservatism and the GOP more bankrupt than today. The attacks on Hillary based ont he possitibility that there might be something incriminating on her e-mail server has become all consuming. This attack blithely ignores the possibility there might be nothing whatsoever. Of course, we’ve all seen this show before: accuse, find nothing, conclude that means there is a cover up, find no evidence of a cover up, declare the reason nothing was found was because the cover up was so good… Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

It is not just the relentless accusations. The alternative being offered by conservatives is just appalling. Donald Trump leads the polls. He does not actually have any policies. It’s just talk. Even columnist George Will dismisses him as “vulgar.”

Of course, we can listen to Jeb Bush talk about Iraq… Talk about appalling!

Ben Carson blew himself up by being dishonest about the usefulness of research using brain tissue from fetuses. He claimed it wasn’t helpful, yet he did exactly that kind of research himself:

I would be hard pressed to name a conservative issue that would appeal to the majority of Americans. There seems to be a lot of anger and hatred directed towards illegal immigrants and Mexicans. The attack on women’s health care issues has reached a fever pitch.

Scott Walker came out against abortions even when the life of the mother is endangered. That is simply monstrous. If any of you conservatives are not sure, look up “ectopic pregnancy.”

There seem to be no ideas whatsoever regarding the economy, other than Trump will be tough. Because our leaders are stupid and the Mexicans and Chinese are smart. But wait! Trump is tough! He’ll make a deal! It will be so great!

Posted by: phx8 at August 13, 2015 10:25 PM
Comment #397444

“You have to look at the intent. To willfully ignore evidence that you have for some ideological reason is wrong. If you’re killing babies and taking the tissue, that’s a very different thing than taking a dead specimen and keeping a record of it.”

Uh huh. Ladies and Gentlemen, Dr. Ben Carson!
So apparently it is all right to harvest the brain tissue of a fetus and record the harvesting, but… but… Does anybody know what the hell Carson is trying to say?

There are numerous videos available to Carson trying to explain what he did and said. He rambles. No one knows what he means. He also goes on about PP engaging in a eugenics exercise targeting the black population.

That’s good enough to poll second among GOP presidential hopefuls this week. Holy cow!

Posted by: phx8 at August 13, 2015 11:29 PM
Comment #397445
The woman just is not that smart. I am smarter than she is. I suspect you are too. W/o her marriage to Bill Clinton, she would have been a reasonably successful lawyer.

Mere conservative talking point C&J. I wish from the right as all they can do is go negative. Not one of those mentioned can go to their record and say they are the equal of Hillary, you know that I know that and yet you spin.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 14, 2015 8:35 AM
Comment #397446


It is my observation. I could be wrong. Perhaps she will release her SAT scores. I think she is smart. No doubt. But I doubt she falls into the genius range her followers seem to think. Her rise is strictly due to her marriage to Bill Clinton. And she still relies on his machine to move her ahead.

Posted by: C&J at August 14, 2015 9:19 AM
Comment #397460

C&J, you have been wrong so often, you have cried wolf so often that you have lost credibility. You are as bad as Fox. You are part of the problem, you blow smoke up the conservatives a**. People like Blaine believe you. Is this what you are willing to do to get Fiorina elected? Have you no decency?

Posted by: j2t2 at August 14, 2015 9:41 PM
Comment #397461

Another so-called scandal bites the dust.

Trump on Fiorina: “Look, you have a woman who got fired from her job. And I mean fired viciously. She got fired viciously. She then went out and lost in a landslide when she ran in California for the Senate (to Barbara Boxer in 2010). And I mean, she lost in a landslide. She got clobbered. And now she’s running for president. Now, I’m all for it. I think she’s a very nice woman. But she got fired. And, she lost in a landslide. Does that qualify you to run for president?”


“I know about firing people. I fire people all day long. I make millions of dollars firing people on television. I know more about firing than anybody in the world.

She got fired more viciously than anybody I’ve ever fired.”

Posted by: phx8 at August 14, 2015 10:26 PM
Comment #397472


Re Hillary - we will see what comes out. I think Hillary is in serious trouble. You think it is just smoke. Time will tell.

Posted by: C&J at August 15, 2015 5:24 PM
Post a comment