For Those Convinced Of Clinton’s Corruption

Think about this for a moment: Is there any result of the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email misuse that wouldn’t have made you even more certain that she was completely corrupt? While she was secretary of state, she used a private email server. She has admitted over and over that this was a mistake. The FBI investigated her, and after their investigation, they concluded that although her private email server was “extremely reckless,” there was no indication whatsoever of any sort of criminal intent. So, if the FBI investigation would have come back and recommended an indictment, you all would have said, “See? I told you so!” But now, when the FBI investigation concludes that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” you are all still using this decision as proof of Hillary Clinton’s perceived corruption, and you’re still standing there, like, “See? I told you so!”

Hillary Rodham Clinton

“Is there any answer I could give that would satisfy you?”

You see, this is what happens when you attack a person and accuse her being part of some corrupt cabal that is “above the law.” When you bring charges against her and they don’t stick, you can look at the cameras and say, “See?” It’s actually a brilliant attack… It’s kind of like accusing someone of being an alcoholic, and then when she tells you she’s not, you say, “See? There it is… Denial.” The same thing happened with the Benghazi investigations. After eight different Benghazi hearings (at a cost of millions of dollars) conclusively found that Secretary Clinton did nothing wrong, the damage is still done, because it reinforces the perceived narrative that Hillary Clinton is so corrupt that she is “above the law.” But maybe she is not above the law… Maybe she just didn’t do the things they are accusing her of doing.

And the hell of it is, this line of attacks is successful. So successful, in fact, that there are a lot of people who look at the prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency, and actually don’t know who would be worse–Her, or the dumpster fire known as Donald Trump. Some are even considering her as the lesser of two evils. It has affected me as well. I get it. It works. I don’t really trust her either… And I’m not even sure why. Which of all the accusations against her have actually stuck? When you press people to name something, they can’t. After some amorphous talk about emails, Benghazi, being “crooked,” enabling Bill’s infidelity, and maybe even tossing in some conspiracy theory email forward about a list of people close to the Clintons who died, usually people end up with a very unspecific, “I don’t know… I just don’t TRUST her.” And they’ll question her integrity. They’ll call her a liar… And then, it’s the same game: “She’s a liar! Want proof? ‘Hillary, are you a liar?’ [No.] <–SEE?!? There she goes again…” Even though the non-paritsan, Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking site PolitiFact has shown Hillary’s statements to be the most consistently truthful of any of the candidates (51% true or mostly true… even more than the Bernie I love so much), while showing that only 9% of the things Donald Trump says are rated “true” or “mostly true.” That’s NINE percent… Then, when actual journalism doesn’t line up with your accepted narrative, what do you do? That’s right… You call the journalist liars as well. That, or you spend billions of dollars setting up an overtly biased “news” organization that damages the whole concept of news. COUGHFoxCOUGH…

dlGtWst.png

For some reason, they don’t seem to focus near as much on the outfits the men wear…

And if you don’t think that part of this has to do with Hillary being a woman, you are fooling yourself. Even as a young man in college, I can remember having a deep sense of “Who does she think she is?” while Hillary Clinton tried to get her healthcare bill passed. It wasn’t an overt “She needs to know her place,” but it was something close. But if a man had the tenacity and adept political maneuvering that Hillary Clinton has displayed, those things would be viewed as assets. But with her, it just comes off as her being conniving. Or “bitchy.” But as Tina Fey and Amy Poehler said while Hillary was campaigning against Barack Obama, “Bitch is the new black.” Anyway, who were you expecting? If a woman was ever going to rise to being a stone’s throw from the most powerful position in a country that has been so very patriarchal for it’s entire history, did you think she was going to be a wilting violet? She has had to navigate a harsh political landscape for decades… Of course she’s a bitch. Bitches get shit done. Again–I get it. It’s distasteful when people compromise their principles… But governing is about compromise. Compromise  is a necessity. When a nation is as divided as ours is, uncompromising principles is a recipe for getting nothing done. AND WE HAVE SOME THINGS THAT NEED TO GET DONE!

hillary-clinton.jpg

Seriously… Just who were you expecting?

Instead, we have found ourselves living in a situation where many are SO ENTRENCHED in the “She’s crooked” narrative, that news can come out showing that Hillary Clinton did NOT do anything illegal, and her enemies are still sharing the story as if it is some sort of proof of her corruption. It’s craziness. And this is not to say that Hillary Clinton is above criticism. She’s not. Not even close. There are plenty of things for which she is responsible that she needs to answer for. The crime bill she and her husband championed is responsible for our prison population more than tripling since Bill Clinton’s presidency. It has negatively and disproportionately affected minorities, and it has basically set up a new system of enslavement and disenfranchisement for people of color. This is well worth criticizing… The trouble is, most of the people rooting for Trump APPRECIATE a policy that results in more brown people in prison… So the GOP can’t focus on that.

hillary-clinton-benghazi-.jpeg

Like a lot of you, I’m not super wild about it, but I guess “I’m With Her.”

But let’s just say–for the sake of argument–that all of her critics’ charges against her are true. Let’s say that she intended for those four people to die in the consulate attacks in Benghazi. Let’s say she fully intended to illegally and maliciously set up a less-than-secure email server for her job as Secretary of State. Lets say that she is guilty of everything from Whitewater to Benghazi and everything in-between… Even if it were all true, she still managed to keep herself out of trouble while just about every republican in a position of power has tried to prove it. That would be AMAZING! How impressive… Listen–Donald Trump can’t even dodge the charges from one little fraudulent “University.” One of two things is true: Either Hillary Clinton’s enemies cannot get any of these charges to stick to her because she is too politically astute, or they’re not sticking because she actually didn’t do them. Either way, she is infinitely more qualified to lead our nation than the angry, racist, inept, misogynistic, unknowledgeable, unstable buffoon that is the alternative… A man so colossally unqualified, that if you said the words “angry, racist, inept, misogynistic, unknowledgeable, unstable buffoon” on a gameshow, people would be able to guess who you’re talking about. Think about that. Make the right choice, America.

Facebook has (once again) changed its algorithm to make it harder for content-creators like myself to get their work out there without paying them money. If you like the stuff I write, share it on Facebook or Twitter. And if you REALLY like a certain post, you can give on PayPal and designate which post you’d like your money to go toward “boosting” on social media. Otherwise, you can BECOME A PATRONKimberly Torrey-White just did. Why? Because being generous is fun. And because she rocks.

This entry was posted in 2) Politics and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

291 Responses to For Those Convinced Of Clinton’s Corruption

  1. mihipte says:

    The most the FBI was willing to pin on her in relation to the e-mail case was negligence/recklessness, which seems right to me. And I still think she’s corrupt. And I still plan to vote for her. This is a very interesting election season.

    • Bosnia alone is enough reason to realize that she is a mentally ill LIAR! who cannot be trusted!

      • Yen says:

        So far, more people will vote for Hillary than any other candidate! Election win by majorities not by one person’s opinion! Right now, all are just speculations, we wait and see who the voter want to be our next president! I happen to believe she will make a great president, and the more I know her the more l like her, and I am not alone!,,,

      • theboeskool says:

        Like… The country of Bosnia existing? That country is proof of her mental illness? And dishonesty? And untrustworthiness?

        Sounds comprehensive…

      • Kristy Shanahan says:

        To me, the Bosnia thing is by far the very most pathetic criticism of Hillary. What it is is that she was briefed about dangers in the area and then when questioned was a little too dramatic in her response about the dangers possibly from being a little afraid of the situation. This was her BIG crime! What a joke. So she said they landed under fire, when she should have said there was a lot of gunfire in the area. Your criticism is so blown out of proportion. Be honest for once, haven’t you ever been in a scary situation and reacted similarly?
        Another criticism they always quote to show how dishonest she is is how she said she had relatives that were immigrants when she really only had one relative that was an immigrant. The dirt pushers that have all this gossip about lying Hillary are the most pathetic bunch. No important lies on any matters of state just a bunch of overblown hogwash.

      • Frank Pintye says:

        Shows what an idiot you truly are.

      • theboeskool says:

        That’s enough name calling.

      • Gregory Mead says:

        If you feel that she is a liar and therefore should not be president, you should be even more concerned that Trump could be president, because he hardly ever tells the truth. And like it or not, those are the only two realistic choices. Bernie, Jill Stein, or Gary Johnson can only suck votes away from the other two. As a result, I would question your mental state if you plan on voting for any of those three.

        Note that I managed to make my case without using all those exclamation points, too.

      • Hi Mike Schoepke, the fact that you feel qualified to diagnose a political opponent as a mentally ill liar suggests that you are the person afflicted by mental illness. And actually, I have to say, the majority of people suffering from mental illness are probably more honest, more stable, and more committed to social justice than the likes of you.

      • Patti Rosenmund says:

        What about Bosnia?

      • S. DRISCOLL says:

        Please give us symptoms of mental illness that Hillary exhibits that can make a valid diagnosis.

      • Kathryn Sanders says:

        Bosnia?

      • Causting says:

        What? You should check your spelling before posting so people can respond. I get you don’t like her but what exactly did you mean by ill LIAR? And I have a question for you, how is it trump has lied 94% of the time, and yet you do not mention that? No one tells the truth 100% of the time, but he lies almost 100% of the time. Clinton admitted her mistake, trump has never admitted or apologize for any of his lies. Evem when he was caught red handed trying to keep the money from his “charity” event for Vets. He only gave it after he was called out on it. Where is your outrage? It’s sad that you and your kind are so busy hating that the truth evades you. My condolences to you.

      • RogerW says:

        As far as her being mentally ill, are you a doctor (psychiatrist)? As for her lying, I think the most we can call what she did was stretch the truth.
        “I was on the plane with then First Lady Hillary Clinton for the trip from Germany into Bosnia in 1996. We were put on a C-17 – a plane capable of steep ascents and descents – precisely because we were flying into what was considered a combat zone. We were issued flak jackets for the final leg because of possible sniper fire near Tuzla. As an additional precaution, the First Lady and Chelsea were moved to the armored cockpit for the descent into Tuzla. We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip. From Tuzla, Hillary flew to two outposts in Bosnia with gunships escorting her helicopter.”
        former Clinton speechwriter Lissa Muscatine
        I was a Bernie supporter also and like Bernie I will support Hillary.
        We need to be truthful and get the facts, We don’t need to act like a bunch of haters like the repugs.

    • C, Nelsen says:

      James Comey – head of FBI used to work with Clinton – so where is the SURPRISE??? One guy got tried and CONVICTED, kicked out of military because he locked his appointment schedule in his desk…WHAT!!!!! Yes…and WHO says Clinton is clean – ONLY the blind kisser-up-her-butt people…SHE LIED to the people, the FBI, the SENATE – she CLAIMED she did NOT have any coded secret e-mails – THAT IS PROVED – a lie is a lie is a lie – When it is NOT THE TRUTH, IT IS A LIE…DUH!!!

      • Matilda Gregory says:

        He did not lock it in his desk. Gave it to his mistress.

      • Without even reading your post, just by glancing at the style of writing, I can tell who you’re voting for.

      • Gary Roth says:

        You are seriously demented. Comey is a Republican, put there by a Republican president. He has been called out for improperly making a statement about her, when the FBI policy is only to judge whether the person violated the law. Saying more was out-of-line and out-of-bounds. The rest of your statement is rediculous garbage – not only not proved, but just conspiracy theory crap. Put your tin foil hat back on – the aliens are trying to read your mind again.

      • Rick Z. says:

        And how many politicians who have been in the public eye as long as Hillary have not lied or made empty promises? Trump has uttered so many falsehoods in such a short time as a candidate. And his ethics are certainly not beyond reproach–think Trump University and the reports on nonpayments to vendors, for example.

      • Melanie Ho says:

        Dumb dumb

      • Russotti says:

        James Comey is a Republican. Clearly, if she received or sent marked classified documents, he would have nailed her for the sake of his party no mater who he worked for. By law, classified documents must be marked in bold print top and bottom. All documents sent from .gov websites are scanned for sensitive data. It is illegal for anyone to have sent her classified over conventional networks. Information classified after the fact does not qualify as illegal. One paragraph that had no classified info. was incorrectly marked with a “c” in parenthesis. in fact, even if it was, in the hierarchy of security, that level is trivial. So, since there was no breach in security, Comey cleverly reprimanded her for reckless behavior (having a server) and created the appearance that she got “privileged” treatment. That successfully fueled the naive to hate “crooked Hillary” . Brilliant strategy but deceitful! Sadly, once blinded by hate, her haters are unresponsive to fact.

      • Mimi says:

        caps lock really help get your point across

      • Kelley says:

        Comey’s a republican. He’s never been a great Hillary supporter.

      • Dwight Ratcliff says:

        If he had locked the material in his desk, he would have not been fired.

    • Big D says:

      You are stupid! Put your ear next to the mic so I can hear the ocean.

    • Tony elhajj says:

      Follow , all you little sheep… Just follow her to hell.. Once you’re there there is no turning back!!

    • Jeff Mace says:

      I think i’m even walking away from the “corrupt” moniker. I think she’s calculated, I think that she’s shrewd. I think that there is a lot of politicking in politics…people make deals and use strategy. To assume this isn’t being done in those posturing themselves for the highest office in the land is just naive. My biggest, and maybe only regret losing Bernie is the veto power he would have brought. I felt he would have been one that was actually on “our” side, and that she is far more likely to allow skewed policy that benefits big biz the same way that center-left governments always had. That said…in trade we get a pretty well road-tested stateswoman, a policy and lawmaker with massive experience. And a person who..literally..knows every leader in the world personally. I’m still voicing when i think she and her buddies are letting the people down…but overall, i’m willing to compromise.

  2. Gil Gonzalez says:

    I’m not a fan of Hillary, and yes, she’s a better choice than Drumpf (see http://bit.ly/_Drumpf, 18:40), but I think the issue here is there appears to be no punishment whatsoever for the transmission of classified information on her part. Yes, per the language of the law*, intent does appear to be an important factor, and this may be the issue to which Director Comey was referring. Still, it means that with regards to the classified information that was transmitted, Clinton either didn’t know or didn’t care, neither of which is enough to disqualify her as a candidate, but does add fuel to the anti-Hillary camp’s bonfire. Personally, I think it’s the latter. I think the reason so many people dislike Hillary is because she is smug and carries herself with an air of entitlement. She’s a ‘House of Cards’ stereotype, where rules apply to others and not to her.

    IMHO, the management of classified information is in the same ballpark as perjury. It’s critically important to prosecute anyone who discloses classified information in the same way it’s critically important to prosecute anyone who lies under oath. Clinton may get by on the ‘intent’ loophole (an objectively true legal point), but her either incompetence or indifference in the handling of classified information is, well, criminal.

    *US code regarding the disclosure of classified information begins with, “Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates….” (see https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798)

    • Gregory Mead says:

      “I think the reason so many people dislike Hillary is because she is smug and carries herself with an air of entitlement” – and yet many of those people will say they plan on voting for Trump because of it. And he’s NOT smug? And he DOESN’T have an air of entitlement?

      That’s why this is sexism. Or hypocrisy. Take your pick.

      • John R Schuh says:

        Why do you admire a woman who rose to national prominence only because she was married to a talented politician. She is the equal of Margaret Thatcher, she is not even Teresa May, who is likely to be the next British prime minister. She is like those consorts of Argentine presidents follow term-limited husbands into office and left the control in a permanent economic funk for sixty years. But can’t compare her either with Eva Peron who was never President but whose beauty and charm brought her husband to power and whose memory kept him there.

      • Stefanie says:

        This is in response to John Schuh. Hillary Clinton did not rise to national prominence because she was married to a talented politician – that is short-sighted and I would say sexist. She began working on political campaigns from a young age, including McGovern and Carter. She was an accomplished lawyer, recognized in 1988 and 1991 by National Law Journal as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America. She was an effective Senator and Secretary of State, and used opportunities as First Lady to support causes and legislation (notably universal health care). A comparison to Margaret Thatcher is laughable. Clinton was one of the most liberal members during her time in the Senate. According to an analysis of roll call votes by Voteview, Clinton’s record was more liberal than 70 percent of Democrats in her final term in the Senate. (http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/hillary-clinton-was-liberal-hillary-clinton-is-liberal/). Clinton also has a history of very liberal public statements. Clinton rates as a “hard core liberal” per the OnTheIssues.org scale. She is as liberal as Elizabeth Warren and barely more moderate than Bernie Sanders. There have been a few issues on which Hillary Clinton has taken more centrist positions. She, of course, voted for the Iraq War (she now says that was a mistake).

      • mihipte says:

        This FBI decision has nothing to do with Drumpf (I hope). Neither should opinions about it.

        I don’t know what the appropriate sentence is for recklessly leaking classified documents, but Hillary deserves it. And, for that reason and others, she doesn’t deserve the presidency. But I’ll vote for her anyway because I estimate we’ll be safer with her than with Drumpf.

      • Dan says:

        The collective smugness of both the Republican and Democratic parties is why I won’t vote for either. Go Gary Johnson!

      • Chance Jones says:

        If you run a stop sign and slam into someone, killing them. You are guilty of criminal homicide because you “knowingly and willingly” ignored a posted law and it resulted in someone’s death, though you did not “intend” to kill that person.

        Now, if you run an intersection where to stop sign was mistakenly or intentionally removed, and you slam into someone, are you still liable for that death? I mean, after all, somewhere I’m sure you could get information about all the posted laws of all the intersections, regardless of if the sign is posted or not. So you technically ran a stop sign, even though it was not posted.

        Regardless, it is not reasonable to hold a person legally accountable for traffic laws that are not properly posted, just as it is not reasonable to prosecute a person for mistakenly mishandling classified information that is not properly marked. This is what is meant by “criminal intent” here.

        In addition to Comey saying “no reasonable prosecutor would bring an indictment based on these facts”, no reasonable jury would convict Clinton based on these facts as well.

        It is not the FBI director’s job to weigh in on a persons actions if he cant provide a legal argument for an indictment. The FBI’s business is enforcing federal law, not publicly tar and feathering people. Comey’s comments are in contrast with the FBI’s stated code of ethics, so there is clearly something more going on here than an investigation into wrongdoing. Whether she was “reckless” is obviously an opinion, and not a legal assessment if no charges are being recommended.

        This BS “scandal” should have ended a long time ago.

        End of discussion.

      • This is in response to John Schuh. Bill Clinton has said that he knew from the start that she was the more talented politician, in every aspect except perhaps natural ease at schmoozing crowds. (She is said to be great one on one.) He urged her to run for public office before he did, and she chose to take a back seat to his political career. That is perhaps a result of growing up being told there are things you will never be able to do because you are a woman. Who can say what her career would have been had she not been married to Bill Clinton? But I can guarantee you that she would not have been clerking at Wal-Mart.

      • You are right, Gregory Mead. It is both.

      • Hmbelle says:

        Is there a big difference between smug and arrogance? Plus he’ll definitely destroy this country with his lack of knowledge.

    • C, Nelsen says:

      SINCE WHEN is ignorance of the law a LEGAL EXCUSE? Since WHEN is a supposedly “qualified” person who is SOS NOT expected to know what issues, material (the EXACT location of an Ambassador who is being hunted by an enemy) transferred that results in a murder NOT a crime…even IF she “didn’t care” or was “indifferent” …NO EXCUSE for NOT taking the precautions…stupid IS STUPID and/OR INTENTIONALLY allowing this to happen is NOT the sign that a COMPETENT person is in a position of such high responsibility…SHE KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY COMMUNICATES”…IF SHE IS, AS YOU ALL CLAIM, QUALIFIED TO BE POTUS…SHE KNEW AND DID SO WILLFULLY!!! END OF EXCUSES…IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DO THE TIME (OR THINK YOU ARE IMMUNE) DON’T DO THE C-R-I-M-E!!! NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!!!

      • T says:

        Hilary is better than Trump!!!

      • T says:

        why don’t we elect Darth Vader as president? He is way better than Hillary or trump.

      • J. Abbate says:

        She broke no law. Laws are on the books, not in people’s opinions. All the Republican lawmakers, lawyers, and politicians have worked hard to smear Hillary for over 20 years and the best they could come up with was Benghazi and Emails. They ignore hundreds that were killed in service to America in embassy attacks in previous administrations to whine about Benghazi and ignore the fact that thousands of cleared personnel use their home systems/servers for handling secret and classified emails and documents everyday. I handled classified documents in my home system and home office for 7 years with a DSS cleared certificate and never had a problem, since the GOP was not after me, nor did they force the FBI Director to testify before Congress re: this common practice. The FBI does not oversee all classified communication, since DSS performs investigations, interviews, and grants clearances. Duh. This is what happens when your party has no real policy or plan to offer to help America. All that is left is character assassination to vote against a candidate, since their candidate is bereft of experience, honest plans for improvement, a positive vision for all Americans, and even the capability to provide a decent written speech for his wife. Pitiful really.

      • Bill Carte says:

        No. She has not been found guilty or innocent by a court or jury. She has been found I prosecutable by political appointees. Not by a judge or a grand jury who are there to decide what law if any was broken. The people charged with the investigation do not determine guilt or innocence. If justice is to be served, if Hilary is to be vindicated it must be by our system of our Courts of Law. There my friends is the rub as they say. Had she been vindicated by a Federal Grand Jury, I would be more accepting. However she has not. It is another example of an inept if not criminal federal bureaucracy.

      • Chance Jones says:

        If you run a stop sign and slam into someone, killing them. You are guilty of criminal homicide because you “knowingly and willingly” ignored a posted law and it resulted in someone’s death, though you did not “intend” to kill that person.

        Now, if you run an intersection where to stop sign was mistakenly or intentionally removed, and you slam into someone, are you still liable for that death? I mean, after all, somewhere I’m sure you could get information about all the posted laws of all the intersections, regardless of if the sign is posted or not. So you technically ran a stop sign, even though it was not posted.

        Regardless, it is not reasonable to hold a person legally accountable for traffic laws that are not properly posted, just as it is not reasonable to prosecute a person for mistakenly mishandling classified information that is not properly marked. This is what is meant by “criminal intent” here.

        In addition to Comey saying “no reasonable prosecutor would bring an indictment based on these facts”, no reasonable jury would convict Clinton based on these facts as well.

        It is not the FBI director’s job to weigh in on a persons actions if he cant provide a legal argument for an indictment. The FBI’s business is enforcing federal law, not publicly tar and feathering people. Comey’s comments are in contrast with the FBI’s stated code of ethics, so there is clearly something more going on here than an investigation into wrongdoing. Whether she was “reckless” is obviously an opinion, and not a legal assessment if no charges are being recommended.

        This BS “scandal” should have ended a long time ago.

        End of discussion.

      • Melanie Ho says:

        Dumb dumb

      • Astraea_M says:

        Since different laws have different standards, and the laws in question required either intent or gross negligence (which has a specific legal meaning.)

      • You truly are delusional. You bought into all the RW talking points. Hillary has been cleared of any wrong doing on the Benghazi BS and Amb. Stevens family has requested all GOPers quit using it to bash Hillary with.

      • Hannah says:

        Nelson, locking the cap key isn’t a substitute for thoughtfully written words. Screaming louder than others doesn’t automatically make you right, no matter how loudly or how often you yell. It comes across as out of control and ignorant.

    • Ljm says:

      The emails were classified after the fact, or were not obviously marked as clasdified, and were sent TO her not FROM her.

    • CLIFFY says:

      The state department says NO email was classified when it passed through her hands. Several were classified later, which happens often in government.

    • Fred McGalliard says:

      Gill, your grasp of “secret information” may be prejudiced in it’s own right. I do not know personally what classification level Hillary or her correspondents “should” have used by the rules of their own organization at the time. I do know that this process is much more uncertain than your argument indicates. Note that my experience is mostly with military and industrial classified, the entire process is often more a matter of opinion than a settled fact. I would be very very careful about trying to make the classification level the current FBI investigation has assigned an inarguable fact. And further, convicting Hillary, without trial or the opportunity to argue before an impartial judge, of reckless handling of classified information was an illegal, immoral, and inappropriate use of the office. Hillarie’s errors may be an appropriate issue to discuss but we should keep them in proper perspective or we will end up the very prejudiced judges we were warned against.

    • Orcasite says:

      Except if it is a criminal statute with an intent requirement, it’s not criminal. That’s the law.

    • Patti Rosenmund says:

      Gil, I agree with you, but other Secretaries of state did similar things, and have even kind of vouched for Hillary. My problem with this whole thing is that we don’t seem to have any true secure system that anyone can rely on. And why not?

      • Allan MacDonald says:

        The SOS before Clinton was Colin Powell and he STARTED the use of email in the State Dept. The jerk above should leave his name as he was not allowed to use his own machines for Classified or Secret documents. He would be charged with a crime. Look at the Chris Wallace interview on Sunday where he compared the statements that Comey made, Under Oath to Congress, with her lies to Chris Wallace during his interview. Comey stated yes when asked if she was untruthful. She lies all the time. Wake up. He should have recommended an indictment, but Loretta Lynch would have tossed it.

    • There were no emails in her private email account that were classified at the time they were received by her and I believe only four of them classified later.

  3. Nora Williams says:

    Sorry, I tend to always agree with you, but not on this one. I am really disappointed in this article. Just because there wasn’t “criminal intent” doesn’t mean she didn’t break the law. She did. Here is an NPR article on the four laws that she violated: (http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law). Her lawyers (upon her direction) ERASED 30,000 emails without ANY oversight. Comey said that her “lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.” If that doesn’t reek of corruption, then what does? If I tell the police officer that I didn’t INTEND to speed, he would laugh and give me a ticket. And because she apologizes and says it is a mistake doesn’t remove the fact that she made incredibly poor judgement (time after time). They all found that she acted with poor judgement (and she admits that), they just couldn’t find anything that she did wrong enough to indict her for. So does that mean she is innocent? She knew damn well that she was bypassing regulations and there are now emails from her proving that she instructed her staff to remove classifications and send it anyway, etc. The Politifact information you quote is also flawed. If you look carefully at the graph you reference, the number of statements by Hillary compared to those of Sanders are almost twice as many. This skews the percentages. And if you look at the number of times she has been false, mostly false or pants on fire, she outnumbers Sanders statements 2:1 or better. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/fact-checking-2016-democratic-presidential-candida/ You stated in your article that most people can’t even identify why they don’t trust her? I sure can. I don’t trust her because she lied about fracking and environmental issues and then sold fracking to other countries of the world. She only recently jumped ship to join the fight for LGBTQ rights after years of saying that she was anti gay marriage. She has lied about not sending classified emails through her personal server. She won’t release the transcripts of her Goldman Sachs speeches. She hasn’t had a press conference in 7 months. She took millions of dollars through her foundation from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar and other middle eastern countries that oppress women and kill gays, and now it seems that while she was SOS she facilitated multi million dollar arms deals with these countries. She voted for the war in Iraq. She championed her husbands crime bill which imprisoned millions of black men in this country. Do I need to go on? You can google each and every one of those things I just mentioned for yourself, please don’t take it from me. And finally, as a woman, I am insulted that you say that she is being targeted because she is a woman. There are MANY women in high levels of government positions and those that run large corporations. More countries less progressive than ours have had women prime ministers. This country is ready for a woman president and I believe would be elect one in a minute if it was anyone other than Hillary Clinton. Bitches get things done? Wow, you really blew this one Mr. Boeskool. Governing is about compromising? And lying, and bribery, and money laundering, and cronyism. You are right, Trump would be a disaster for this country. It is too bad that the DNC corrupted the process because the best candidate, who would be killing the Donald right now has been banished from the party and is seen as a nuisance. And now all of us who support him are being bullied into drinking the HRC koolaid. I will not vote for Hillary in November. I cannot close my eyes, hold my nose and hope for the best. Nor will I vote for Trump. I will write in Bernie Sanders.

    • Bkothe says:

      Couldn’t have said it better myself..agree completely..

    • I’m sorry Nora .No point by point take down,but you must stop saying that the erasure was her call.It was,in fact,from the office of the POTUS.Look and research before you post things in writing,because you like one Democrat better than another.She wasn’t sure what to do,and her legal team spoke with the President about his discretion in the case,as they should have.One more important fact is that she was denied a safe phone ,when she requested one,so the FBI ,conveniently left out the one thing that really made it look like a witch hunt.

      • terry heiser says:

        SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN MILE HIGH COLORADO OR JUST STUPID?, , PASS THE PIPE DUD..EH DUDE.

      • theboeskool says:

        Terry–Stop. Stop being mean. And stop writing things in all caps. And stop making up unintelligible and superfluous punctuation. All those things. Just stop.

      • Never been to Colorado.I would love to see the territory.I am a Christian and don’t use, which is my choice.I see nothing wrong with it,however I am a little uptight.I suggest a spellcheck…Dud.

    • Moi says:

      Percentages are used precisely because they aren’t skewed. Someone is 51% factually correct whether they make 100 statements or 100000000000 statements.

    • You do not feel you will throw away your vote… deep breath here. if you have to hold your nose do it, if you can. I fear a police state under Trump. I have grandchildren I want safe….

    • By definition, the laws in question entail intent, specifically “willful disregard”.
      No intent = no crime.

      So many “lawyers” here that don’t seem to understand rudimentary legal concepts.

      • Orcasite says:

        Thank you from a lawyer who these folks are driving nuts. You’re correct. No intent = no crime.

    • Hmbelle says:

      Which law did Bush break when he lied to the American people & got us into this senseless ongoing war costing us trillions of dollars & where’s his trial for 911 that happened on his watch? Hypocrites!

  4. Has there been any other human being that has had to endure more investigations that HRC? Donald Trump has yet had to be investigated for any of the MANY allegations of his shenanigans. He always yells that all media are against him and treating him unfairly all the while enjoying the media’s coverage of his rants. Hillary is a bitch. That’s what strong women have to do to advance in today’s world. While Secretary of State she was the most respected woman in the world. World leaders new not to “play” with her. All Mr. Trump can do is call people names and promise to “Make America Think Again” or something like that :). I still don’t know which era Trump wants us to return to that was so great. Was it when Bill Clinton was president?

  5. Nora Williams says:

    I don’t know why I bothered taking the time to write a thoughtful response to your article. I guess you censor those that may not agree with you?

    • theboeskool says:

      Hey Nora… I’ve been at work all night. When someone comments and has more than one link in their response, WordPress automatically requires my approval to post the comment. It should be up now.

      I appreciate your thoughts on here, and I’m sorry to disappoint you. I’m probably going to write about this soon as well, but I am convinced that the danger of Trump being president is MUCH greater than any danger from Hillary Clinton… even if she did have all those emails deleted on purpose. The *smart* thing for people to do would be to vote for the candidate they think is the best. Bernie is that candidate for me. Unfortunately, the winner of the general election IS going to be either Trump or Clinton. There are WAY too many dumb people in the world… If all the reasonable ones vote for Bernie or Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, then we are looking at a President Trump. The two major candidates are right of center… That does not help the poor or the common folk in the least. I alluded to this in my article, but “uncompromising principles” is not what we need right now. We need hard work. We need rational thought. We need love. And even though it sucks, we NEED compromise. That is what my vote for Clinton will be… A compromise.

      • Nora Williams says:

        Thanks for your response. I appreciate it. And I will not be “unfriending” you or unsubscribing anytime soon 🙂 I have been changed and challenged by your words over the years and I have also shared your blog on my FB page many times and my friends are challenged by your articles as well. I understand why you feel the way you do. And I have struggled mightily with this whole election. A friend of mine (MK Rowe) said this: “Hillary supporters tell us a vote for anyone but her is a vote for Trump. Funny thing…Trump supporters say a vote for anyone but him is a vote for Hillary. No. My vote is my vote and I’m not going to be bullied into voting for someone I do not like, do not trust, whose policies and actions I strongly disagree with, out of fear. I will not pledge blind loyalty to a party that has abandoned the principles and values I believe in. If we don’t stand up and vote for a candidate we truly believe in, things will never change. If we continue to shrug our shoulders at corruption, hold our noses and vote for a “lesser of two evils”, we will have evil as our only option.” I tend to agree. So, I am not throwing in the towel, or considering any other options at this point. A lot can happen between now and July 25th and November 1st. Trump can be overthrown by his own party, or his own stupidity. And super delegates have not yet voted. Let’s not jump the gun and wave the flag for Hillary just yet. Well, you can, but I’m not! Peace and love to you Bro!

      • Patrich says:

        Shillary much.

      • Jeff says:

        I belive it was Einstine that said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Vote your party because its your party, compromise your integrity because you think its the lesser of two evils, thats condoning that behavior. Change would be saying I’m not voting for Trump or Hillary because I am done allowing poloticians doing this anymore and I will not lend my streangth or voice to them any more. Plug your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils please….. Thats insanity.

      • theboeskool says:

        You should just vote for a random person you meet at Kroger… They have the same chance of making a difference.

    • theboeskool says:

      Also, I don’t censor people unless they are being threatening or being just a complete, unrelenting ass hole. I can’t imagine you being either of those. Hopefully you’ll stick around, even though we disagree here. 🙂

  6. Tristan says:

    I thought that maybe this would be a good article but then you started talking about how you think people hate Hillary because she’s a woman. I’ve been pushing Jill Stein for a little while now so reading something like that as my reason for disliking Hillary is utterly absurd.

    • theboeskool says:

      Do you really think that what I was trying to say was that every single person who didn’t like Hillary Clinton was doing it out of a hatred for women?

      • Tristan says:

        Not necessarily I suppose, and if you didn’t mean that, then forgive me for making such an assumption. However your article repeatedly creates broad generalizations about the type of people who may not be happy with Hillary Clinton as a president. Such statements aren’t aimed at anyone in particular, but they don’t claim to exclude individuals either. They come off as an attempt to get into the mind of someone without actually knowing anything about them, and then make broad claims about them. Your article also seems to imply that not being for Hillary means someone is for Trump.

        Overall it just comes off as rude and insensitive.

    • Susan says:

      Yes, “for a little while now.” Of course. Rather the way people insisted that they were for Elizabeth Warren, so that had to prove they weren’t sexist.

      http://www.houstonpress.com/arts/elizabeth-warren-is-everyone-s-political-girlfriend-who-lives-in-canada-8362222

      • Tristan says:

        No, its just inconveniently timed. I only started learning more about 3rd party candidates a few weeks ago. After reading everything I could, I came to the conclusion that Jill Stein is pretty much a second Bernie Sanders, so I decided that I would vote for her since she shares ideals that I find important for the presidency. Then a few days after coming to such a conclusion, a friend posted a link to this article, so I decided to give it a read. Please don’t make claims about people without knowing who they are or why they think the way they do; its offensive and rude.

  7. Nikkistory says:

    Comey ended his speech with: “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.” Explain how two people, in similar circumstances, face different consequences if one of them is not corrupt? To compare it to other mainstream issues, I would say this is an example of Clinton Privilege.

    Quoting you, “But if a man had the tenacity and adept political maneuvering that Hillary Clinton has displayed, those things would be viewed as assets. But with her, it just comes off as her being conniving.” But then you also say, “the dumpster fire known as Donald Trump.” Somehow he’s managed to win over a very large number of people, yet his tactics, tenacity and adept political maneuvering aren’t viewed as assets. With him, it just comes off as him being a racist a**hole.

    • theboeskool says:

      If you want to consider using racism to court racist voters as “adept political maneuvering,” that’s your thing.

      Also, getting reamed out by the FBI director on national television for not doing things right is a “consequence.” There are all kinds of consequences for a mistake like this… Anything from a stern talking to, to getting fired, to criminal charges. They investigated her, and felt that there was not enough evidence to suggest that she did something maliciously wrong. Careless? Yes. Criminal? No.

      • Nikkistory says:

        You didn’t really answer my questions.

        Getting a stern lecture is a consequence? That is laughable! Oh, wow. Where was Petraeus’ stern lecture and a pass?

        As for your answer to Trump, really? That’s your answer? Whether you like it or not, he’s up there. There are people, weirdly enough, that like him. Just like there are people who, again, weirdly enough, like Hillary. It’s just a matter as what side you’re standing on that determines who’s the bigger f*ck up. You’re essentially using the same argument against Trump that you’re railing against in your post above.

        But when you’re trying to defend someone like Hillary, the best a person can do, I suppose, is skirt the questions you don’t like and spew out BS to try and confuse people.

      • Nikkistory says:

        “But if a man had the tenacity and adept political maneuvering that Hillary Clinton has displayed, those things would be viewed as assets.” Furthermore, this is an insult to women everywhere. This is simply the argument of a man who has no real idea what it means to be a woman being compared to a man on a regular basis, but thinks this is an argument people, especially women, want to hear. No. Women can legitimately be horrible at something simply because they are horrible at it. They’re not horrible at it because they’re a woman and can’t live up to a man’s standard.

      • theboeskool says:

        Again, saying “a big part of what people resent about Hillary is her attitude in combination with her sex” is completely different than saying “criticizing her is out of bounds because she is a woman.” I am saying the first, but it seems you are hearing the second.

      • Eugene says:

        After the facts given by FBI Director James Comey, we now know that Hillary Clinton lied under oath when she testified before Congress. She should and can be investigated again by the FBI on this finding by congressman Chaffetz. He told Comey on live television that he will be sending him that recommendation.

      • >> Getting a stern lecture is a consequence? That is laughable!
        >> Oh, wow. Where was Petraeus’ stern lecture and a pass?

        The difference is that Clinton failed to take proper precautions to safeguard the information with which she’d been entrusted. Careless, but it was not her intent to pass it on to anyone else. Petraeus willfully and intentionally handed over classified information to someone who was not authorized to have it.

    • theboeskool says:

      I never stated or even hinted there was no privilege involved in Clinton’s consequence.

      And Donald Trump comes off as an asshole because he is, in fact, an asshole. That is an objective truth. Thanks for stopping by. Here’s your hat…

    • Dee says:

      Nikkistory: From a woman who has worked in a male dominated field for 40 years. There are still people in this country that have issues with a woman in a position of power. Early, in my career, I let men take credit for my work just to get the job done. As I became stronger, I stood up and gave my own opinions. I was known as a hard assed bitch. Certainly, the political arena is much tougher than the fire- EMS field, but still male dominated. Many feel the same about Hillary. I hear from men everyday that this country does NOT need a woman president. I agree that in a man with “the tenacity and adept political maneuvering that Hillary Clinton has displayed, those things would be viewed as assets.” To each her own…peace out.

      • I had a government career where that story was rife. Women often had to let male co-workers take credit for their work. It was more expedient to do that than to be the butt of a hard-ass bitch environment. And even then they were held to a higher standard of behavior than their male counterparts. Today I hear the same comments, including the most offensive statement about women voting for Hillary only because she is a woman.

    • Gregory Mead says:

      “Somehow he’s managed to win over a very large number of people, yet his tactics, tenacity and adept political maneuvering aren’t viewed as assets. With him, it just comes off as him being a racist a**hole.”

      I’m surprised that you don’t understand that the people who view him as “a racist a**hole” aren’t the people that “he’s managed to win over” and “his tactics, tenacity and adept political maneuvering” ARE “viewed as assets” by the second group.

    • Melanie Ho says:

      Dumb dumb 3

    • Astraea_M says:

      Comey ended his speech with: “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.”

      You forgot how he continued, such a person would face ADMINISTRATIVE consequences, e.g. potentially being fired or demoted. Which is not applicable to Clinton since she was not a government employee at the time the investigation was done.

  8. iambcvilla says:

    Hello there, my name is Brittany and I am new to the blogging world. I began following you because your post, “When You’re Accustomed To Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression,” was featured on the Huffington Post. I really liked how you expressed your realization regarding white privilege and oppression through a personal anecdote.

    This post makes me feel like I’m not alone in my belief that Hillary Clinton is the compromise that we need right now. As much as I would love to have everyone feel the Bern for 4 years or more (no I’m not talking about an STD), I must say that I don’t think this country is in the necessary state-of-mind to excel with a Progressive, Un-compromising Left Winger like Bernie. There would be dissension, chaos whenever a bill is proposed, more sit-ins by the Republicans too stubborn to heed to the call of progress. Hillary Clinton is definitely guilty of negligence and she’s not off-the-hook in my eyes regarding all of the issues and topics that Nora brought up. However, I challenge you to find a candidate (that can win against Trump) that has a clean slate. Hillary is the Claire Underwood of our time. Hard, stern, and some of her interests may lie with the upper class, but what do you expect? She has been within the government throughout the past few decades and with such power and influence, sh*t is going to happen. All of our past presidents are guilty of something heinous, almost unjustifiable, whether it is war, inhumane torture, unjust imprisonment, and the list goes on.

    Being President is not as easy as being the good guy or the bad guy (or gal). It’s a matter of making the necessary decision that leads to the best result, and sometimes these decisions are NOT what we would choose.

    On an end note, I would rather see another President Clinton than a President Trump 10 times out of 10, so I will stand with her.

    P.S. Are you open to guest-blogging? I would really like to participate in the important dialogue you are having on this blog!

    if you want, check out my blog: http://www.hungryhornyhonest.wordpress.com

  9. cklein28 says:

    “dumpster fire” these crack me up

  10. Alan says:

    I enjoyed the article, and I mean all due respect, but claiming that HRC is “infinitely more qualified to lead” in the event that she was able to dodge punishments for crimes she was guilty of is absolute garbage.

  11. Go Hillary!!! Trump is a disaster waiting to happen…he can’t tell the truth, it is just not in his DNA.

  12. B Barkley says:

    Do YOU know what ” classified information” means? Much of it is mid-classified. Some is way out of date and known to the general public. I suspect that a person who routinely handles classified information knows what can be sent from home and what needs to wait. Is that observing the letter of the law? No. Is it treasonous? No. Is it expedient? Yes.

  13. Hillary Clinton is a racist mentally ill child-murderer who belongs in prison! She has been a corrupt arrogant pig throughout her entire filthy existence. Bernie or Bust! If Bernie gets cheated out of the nomination, I (and millions of others) will vote for Trump! We hate her! Period!

    • Veronica says:

      @Mike Schoepke, I’m no fan of Hillary’s, but are you really willing to risk the future of our nation to Donald Trump? Until last fall, the man was a punch line! At least with Hillary we know we won’t see the end of the country as we know it. With Donald? Who knows??

    • theboeskool says:

      You seem stable…

    • Melanie Ho says:

      Dumb dumb 4

    • Astraea_M says:

      In other words, you do not care about what Sanders stands for, you just want to say fuck you to Clinton, and are willing to throw everything Sanders believes out to do that.

      You know, that’s your right. But own it. Own that you don’t care a whit about ANY of the Issues, only about hate.

  14. Stu Miller says:

    The Clintons are either the smartest people in the world or the dumbest…

  15. sbazilian says:

    Wonderfully well put!!
    Eloquent!!
    Very grateful for this powerful article; it deserves a huge readership; millions of people should be reading this.

  16. Jackie says:

    You make so many good points. It is a breath of fresh air to hear reason and logic. Thank you for starting my Monday off right!!

  17. Roberta Mineo says:

    “Hillary Harassment” should become a glaring issue. It’s creators and funders should be identified and their tactics should be exposed all over the media. They could be compared with the Inquisitors who burned Joan of Arc at the stake.
    Hillary may not be a saint, but she is an intelligent, hard-working woman who has endured relentless public shaming and slander of the witch hunt variety.

  18. I. Baty says:

    The main issue is the Republicans have imploded and their ship is sinking in deep waters and they threw life boats over long ago because the religious zealots took over their reasoning , Bary Goldwater forcasted that year ago too .Sadly they manipulated many followers that to this day also are on the sinking ship and too stupid to know it’s taking on water .

    • mihipte says:

      Good thing some of us were already in little rowboats. And now we’ve started poking holes in the ship. Sink already, dang it, so we can have a serious party again on the right side of the two-party system.

  19. Thomas Cain says:

    Hillery keeps saying we need to make changes to what the present administration is doing yet she is part of the present problem she is a useless politician whom because she’s a women, a lot of non thinking members of the fairer sex will vote for her. Why are they so desperate to choose her?

    • You are absolutely correct.

      This college educated, veteran of the United States Marine Corps, former Republican is only voting with her vagina. Because It’s talented like that. Takes over my whole life, that thing.

      And folks say it’s not sexism…

      • Jon Stewart says:

        You’re a rare breed! JK. But seriously, you’re not so “educated” if you don’t think some (possibly a lot?) women won’t vote for her only because she’s a woman. Can’t tell you how many interviews I heard on the radio saying people were voting for Obama just because he was black.

        BTW, Trump and Hillary both suck, so don’t assume I’m sexist here. I’d love a female president, I’d just prefer one who’s not a criminal.

  20. Progressive Jones says:

    Throw her into to lake.
    If she floats, she’s guilty.
    If she drowns, she’s innocent.
    Worked in Salem.

    If you want to know WHY you don’t trust HRC, despite the facts, visit Harvard’s Project Implicit page and take a few of the tests. I learned a lot about my own blind spots and unconscious biases by doing so.

  21. Jon says:

    Funny how this author is guilty of the very thing they accuse conservatives of. Spends who article spelling out why it is wrong to reinforce a political stereotype. Then spends the entire latter half calling Trump every hate name under the sun…

    • theboeskool says:

      There are plenty of other “hate names,” Jon.

      • ddukeblu says:

        Thanks for the article. Well said. Trump scares me in so many ways. And he has said very little about how he plans to implement the things he plans. . Thankfully, we each are entitled to our opinion and it is our privilege to vote. I will be voting for Hillary and not just because she is a woman. She does have political experience and I don’t see that Trump has any political experience and his personal life has been interesting, to say the least!

  22. LHS says:

    She is corrupt. This is obvious, the evidence is overwhelming and right out in the open.

    The email scandal has nothing to do with corruption – that was just a typical politician skirting the rules to try and avoid sorts of scandals she’d seen other politicians go through when their emails came out. Unless you stretch the definition of corrupt to include being light years from transparent – which is obviously also bad, but not necessarily corrupt – then this is just an illustration of how much of a hack she is, not whether or not she is corrupt.

  23. vchuchman says:

    Almost…except your part about the 1994 Crime Bill. The one that Joe Biden wrote and Bernie Sanders voted for, yet they are progressive champions. Looks to me like another double standard.

  24. weezer5 says:

    The ‘witch hint’ worked for many minds, but it’s just that, a witch hunt…. She’s bright, well schooled in the ways of gov. , social Needs, global problems, negotiateing, comprising to get a positive outcome (something lacking in Congress today) seams open to new ideas & wiling to let go of the past failed motions, many now see as huge mistakes for Americans & the world.shes worked for society ALL of her life! Few Americans could have walked through the contles attacks & still carried on! She many not be the most eloquent speaker (that’s going to be a huge leap to follow president Obama, who speaks with such grace & sincerity) but she’s to the point & has a clear road to follow. She’s a woman, a mega hurtle to struggle through the good old boy institution, that’s so much of the problem with the muddied heads in our society, those who fail to see the gifts women bring to any task. We are still in the dark ages, the fact we are experiencing the madness of Trump is proof, America has been permently mentally impaired. Shore she has faults, but no one who spent this much time in public service will come out squeaky clean! NO ONE! I will be voting for her & hope she builds a pain that will quell the screams of her haters. One thing she must do to keep us safe is to cut the cord on gmos & her ties with Monsanto & other industries which are harming our world. Corp. America must be controlled, NOW , they have become to powerful & things are out of balance, but this will only happen when we DEMAND CONGRESS HAS TERM LIMITS, I. Q. , ETHICS & SANITY TESTING!

  25. Bill Carter says:

    Normally I would agree with the bulk of your argument. Maybe if David Patreus had not plead guilty and relied on the Obama Administration he too would have been found, what was the term again ? “Extremely Reckless”. No he didn’t. He agreed to a plea deal because everybody except Ms Clinton knows the penalty for exposing military secrets to unauthorized individuals. At the very least even without “Criminal Intent” anyone who signs documents before being given access to Secret Intelligence Material knows the mishandling of said material is a “Criminal Offense”. Please don’t take my word for it. Check out the government protocols for any person receiving from intelligence agencies that nations national security secrets. Look up the penalty for disclosing them to unauthorized sources. Look up the penalty for mishandling them. I know you most likely won’t. That would require real journalists and there are far to few of them left. So to address the article. No. Finding her not chargeable because she is “Extremely Careless” does not give her a pass in my book. It shows she is either not intelligent enough to be President or to careless. Do your own research.

    • gail gagacki says:

      Just so you know, both Condaleeza Rice and Coleman Powell used private email servers while holding the Secretary of State position. Neither of them were investigated or charged with any crimes.

      • DL says:

        No.- Colin Powell and Condaleeza Rice used a private e-mail address, not a private server. Since 2005, State Department rules have stipulated that all communcation must go through official channels. Clinton is the only one to have used a private server, and that was against State Dept. policy.

      • suranis1 says:

        As I mentioned below, basically DLs comment would suggest that Sarah Palin was doing much more secure stuff becasue she was using a Yahoo Mail account to conduct private Government business than Clinton was for using a private server that only she used, that only occasionally had confidential stiff sent to it I might add.)

        Yeah. no-one remembers THAT Sarah Palin email scandal. I wonder why.

      • Bill Carter says:

        Because Sara Pallin wasn’t the Secretary of State with access to the nation’s biggest secrets. Because she is not running for President. Because the Governor of Alaska is not a Federal Cabinet Secretary.

      • suranis1 says:

        Because Its Ok If You Are a Republican. Like Colin Powell.

        “During Secretary Powell’s tenure, the Department introduced for the first time unclassified desktop email and access to the Internet on a system known as OpenNet, which remains in use to this day. Secretary Powell did not employ a Department email account, even after OpenNet’s introduction.” [U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General report, “Office of the Secretary: Evaluation of Email Records Management and Cybersecurity Requirements,” May 2016]

        But hey. the “Liberal Media” was all over the fact that Powell that received the most criticism in the report and used an insecure system, more insecure than a private server used by only one person. Only they spelled Powell “Clinton.”

    • Astraea_M says:

      The word you are missing is INTENT. As in Patreus intentionally handed over national security data to someone who had no clearance. The FBI determined that Clinton had no INTENT to have anyone unauthorized view classified data.

      Laws have meanings, and the meaning of “intent” is not secret

    • Rich says:

      The crimes that General Patreus was convicted of was far more serious than what Mrs. Clinton was alleged to have committed. Apples and oranges isn’t even the start of it.

      Details matter.

    • suranis1 says:

      To DL

      While that is technically true, its not the point. The point is that Powell AND Clinton both used a non departmental server to hold their emails. Only Powell was using a server outside the control of the State dept entirely that had lots of users, while Clintons was a private server that no-one else was using. Basically its like Clinton having files delivered to her home while Powell was using a PO box address down the street that a lot of people were using. A private server was far more secure than what Powell was doing. That’s one reason why Powell was criticised far more than Clinton in the OIG report.

      “OIG identified many examples of staff using personal email accounts to conduct official business; however, OIG could only identify three cases where officials used non-Departmental systems on an exclusive basis for day-to-day operations. These include former Secretaries Powell and Clinton, as well as Jonathan Scott Gration, a former Ambassador to Kenya.” [U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General report, “Office of the Secretary: Evaluation of Email Records Management and Cybersecurity Requirements,” May 2016]

  26. Suzanne VenHorst says:

    Good thoughts. I think Hilkary has spent most of her life preparing to be President. She has taken the steps to be prepared and understands how the world works, understands there will be political resistance to ideas and policies but has been around long enough to know how to get this done. She did not purposefully break any laws as she knew that doing so would hinder her success of serving the Ametican people. She lovesAmerica and will be the best President she can be in spite of all the opposition she will face daily, just like Obama did. I’m with Her!

  27. Gary says:

    I will call her irresponsible and could not trust her decision making skills.As a result, I am of the opinion that she is not suitable to be president of my country.

    • Melanie Ho says:

      Gary you are dumb dumb 6

      • TaraMae Land says:

        no Melanie, you’re the dumb b*** here, you’re the one ready to vote for a corrupt war criminal like hillary ! of course you have nothing on her, she keeps deleting all the evidence . why would you want someone who’s potentially a CRIMINAL to be your president ? dumb c**t !

      • theboeskool says:

        TaraMae–I love that you are okay with calling a stranger a “dumb bitch” and a “dumb cunt,” but you seem to have a moral problem with writing those words out in their entirety. Are you able to see how messed up that is?

        You are okay with the heart behind the cruelty… As long as you don’t say the naughty word. It reminds me of Annie Wilkes in Stephen King’s Misery. And–just so we’re clear–that is not a compliment. Gross.

  28. Jefe says:

    You state “After eight different Benghazi hearings (at a cost of millions of dollars)…” Yet there’s no mention of how much the FBI (tax dollars) spent investigating the email server when she simply could have admitted she did use a private server and multiple devices, which she had denied until the very end.

    It’s simple. If you don’t get it, then you’re just a sycophant. She lied. She continued to lie. She’s lied before. Many times. It’s been proven again and again. She lacks morals as showed by her actions not rumor and character assassination. She’s willing to lie to simply cover her ass and what she perceives as a stellar reputation thanks to sycophants who won’t or can’t tell her the truth. At best she’s a clinical narcissist and at worst a full blown psychopath.

    Lastly the problem continues with you and those like you who absolutely refuse to consider a third party candidate. All you can parrot is “the lesser of two evils.”. The real evil is your inability to see beyond what the media, the DNC, and the RNC want you to see. You perpetuate the me against you mentality rather than foster a us against them (the .gov and media) relationship. You buy into it and feed it by parroting everything ‘they’ tell you.

    • Jon Stewart says:

      Holy freight trains. By far the most sensible reply I’ve seen on here yet. There’s nothing wrong with your argument. The biggest problem with this election is the number of dems and reps that hate their candidate but believe they’re the lesser of two evils and won’t go to a third party. The lesser of two evils is still evil. And even IF Hillary is the lesser, she’s still a godawful person who’s been caught red handed time and time again but continues to do so and these sheep continue to follow blindly. It’s unreal.

      Bravo to you sir. I like you.

  29. JC says:

    What law states that “intent” is the determining factor for whether she did something wrong or not? Please show us that statute! Did she or did she not put US security at risk? Yes she did. Did a Marine officer get thrown out of the service for sending classified email via personal device to warn comrades of a rogue attack that was impending and indeed happened? Yes he did. But we’re supposed to believe she wasn’t treated differently? Did she LIE repeatedly, including to Congress, according to Comey? Yes she did. This article is pathetic. If it walks like a duck….

    • Melanie Ho says:

      Jackie you are super duper dumb dumb #1

    • Astraea_M says:

      That would be the espionage law, which require intent, and the distribution of classified material which requires “gross negligence” (which yes has a legal meaning, and no does not mean “not sufficiently careful.”)

    • Rich says:

      Citation please.

      • mjennings says:

        Rich, I agree. Citation (from a non-partisan source) most definitely needed.

      • Margaret Yoder says:

        Wikipedia entry on the Espionage Act of 1917:

        “It made it a crime:

        To convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both.

        To convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States. This was punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.”

        Look for the word “intent” in each paragraph.

  30. Mike Rodgers says:

    What kind of Nonsense is this? So because the FBI director took 15 minutes to describe how she broke the law in several different ways but concluded that there was no intent because she wasn’t “trying” to be malicious towards the United States, she was only just being extremely reckless, that is somehow OK??? In the follow up Congressional hearing after his announcement of no charges, he admitted that some of the email that was found had information in it that identified intelligence agents. When asked if he would consider giving someone in the FBI top Secret Clearance after recklessly handling classified information, he stated no. But now we are all just supposed to let it go, because she wasn’t indicted. Instead, we are to put her in a position where she can ” recklessly handle ” top secret intelligence and now give her the bonus of enacting decisions recklessly with it as well? And to those above that want to decorate her career as self-made, that’s a crock of $#!+. She got in with the Rose Law firm because of her husband’s pull. She helped as First Lady with her healthcare agenda???? She was the laughing stock of Democrats and Republicans, and that healthcare travesty of a bill was soundly defeated in a bipartisan vote of NO.She was a successful senator???? Please tell me how or what she did that was successful? Was she successful at dodging bullets from imaginary snipers on an airport Tarmac? Was that before or after the group photo and hugging the children? Why is everyone silent about her comments on the 2 guys she defended as a lawyer for raping a girl? Why isn’t anyone wanting to talk about how she boast of getting them such a light sentence? Oh, that’s right because she is running a campaign about being there for women. But the alternative is the same, because Trump is smug and arrogant. But you know what Trump isn’t? Trump isn’t the same old politician from the same group of politicians, that has been running the country into the dirt for decades. That is what he isn’t.

  31. theboeskool says:

    I wonder how many comments it will take before people start to realize that their angry, irrational responses are doing nothing more than proving my points…

    • spectecjr says:

      Well you did provoke the angry, irrational responses by ostensibly calling people idiots, and misogynists. You were expecting some other kind of reaction?

      When you attack people on their choices, they attack back. Multiply one thousand-fold when it’s something they feel very strongly about to begin with.

      There’s several kinds of responses people can have to your blog post:
      * I agree strongly! Yeah, go get ’em!
      * I disagree, because you’re obviously talking about someone else, not me
      * I disagree, and because you’re painting a group I’m a part of in a bad light, I’m going to feel shame, whether it’s the truth or not
      * I disagree, and because you’re painting my group in a bad light, and I know I’m not a bad person, I’m going to experience righteous indignation and give you both barrels.

      Now, it’s great for getting people to spread the word, and get into loud arguments. It’s also highly polarizing.

      All being told that “you don’t like Clinton because you’re biased” does is further entrench people in their positions, and divide everyone into two camps. The opposite of your goal.

      But go ahead. Keep waiting for people to understand your point.

      It might be a while though.

      • Jon Stewart says:

        You forgot one!

        *I disagree because both candidates are liars and hypocrites but everyone is too afraid to vote for a third party candidate for fear that the other large party won’t do the same and their candidate will be elected!

        Too bad we don’t have some sort of counsel that can just remove Trump and Hillary for better options…

        #GoLions! #JKIDon’tActuallyLikeTheLions #HashtagsAreStupid

  32. Jeff B says:

    THANK YOU! I have been saying the same thing and am getting prepared to write about it.

  33. Dorothy Wiggins says:

    When you are done hating the Clintons, try reading Russ Baker’s “Family of Secrets.” Selective neglect is not serving the truth.

  34. Stop apologizing and get behind the best qualified POTUS candidate we have had in decades. I AM wild about her and incensed that so many men AND women still hate and underestimate and diminish talented, strong, capable women. Way to keep the entire country back, by dismissing 50% of the population. (SMH).

    • Daryl Guy says:

      We were, but then Hillary and her cronies in the DNC conspired to keep him from getting the nomination. When Kaine stepped down as the DNC chair and gave it to the head of Hillary’s campaign, DWS, and then DWS “rigged” the primary and Kaine is rewarded with a VP nod, what do you expect the reaction to be?

  35. Britte says:

    There are other parties and other candidates. If enough people vote against the main two, that would send quite a message.

    • Jon Stewart says:

      Let’s do it!

      #KillaryForPrison #DownWithDrumph

      • ddukeblu says:

        If you vote for a Liberal Independent it is a vote for Trump. It MAY send a message but is it worth the risk of a Trump presidency? And likewise, a conservative Independent is a vote for Hilary. Don’t waste your vote, although it is your right.

    • Rich says:

      Then you admit you are perfectly fine with President Trump. All because of “principles” or whatever.

      • Daryl Guy says:

        We were, but then Hillary and her cronies in the DNC conspired to keep him from getting the nomination. When Kaine stepped down as the DNC chair and gave it to the head of Hillary’s campaign, DWS, and then DWS “rigged” the primary and Kaine is rewarded with a VP nod, what do you expect the reaction to be?

    • M Yoder says:

      Yeah – the party working at suppressing voting would be very encouraged by that. You forget that the politicians don’t care if you’re “unhappy” with your options. They really don’t.

  36. Ike Rosen says:

    It’s like shouting at a politician at a press conference,”When exactly did you stop beating your wife and kids?”
    There’s no evidence he ever did,or that anyone ever accused him of it, but no matter what he says, most people will think he’s hiding something.
    Billions of OUR dollars have been wasted by the GOP to try to “prove” these lies, and you’re still convinced that it’s true.
    Grow up. Everything is NOT a conspiracy.

  37. Patrich says:

    The FBI investigation was a farce!
    No criminal intent is needed and stupidity is no excuse. HRC lied and lies again about lying. The fall of the Democratic Party to present a known liar as the ” best candidate” speakers volumes about the Democratic Party and its misguided supporters. Had Hillary Clinton owned her role in the email debacle at the very beginning as well as her and Mr Sotero’s abrogation of duty on the Bhengazi issue. I personally would have viewed Her in a much better light. I still would not vote for a Democrat after Mr Sotero’s poor performance. She is a liar and still receives the party’s support. What does that say about you who support her. Where are the morals you were taught as children. Isn’t that one of the golden rules. Don’t Lie if you want other s to trust your words. Hillary Pinochio Clinton isn’t fit to be President and I believe the Dems know it. Be afraid folks the party’s just about over.

  38. Dan says:

    Lol…. theboeskool gets called out as an idiot, and he replies to that comment by saying “thats enough name calling”. Uh….OK, did u read the last paragraph of your post where you called Trump a “racist, misogynistic, unstable buffoon?” Typical liberal rant. Your one opinion wont change the fact that Trump is going to be the next president, and that scares the hell out of you.

    • theboeskool says:

      Yeah… I didn’t think I was being called an idiot. Honestly, I thought the person doing the name-calling was calling someone an idiot who DISagreed with me.

      You’re right, Dan… The idea of a Trump presidency does scare the hell out of me. Just as an incompetent person flying a plane I was sitting on would scare the hell out of me. I chose the words of my characterization of Trump very carefully. Every word of it is true. The exact quote is “angry, racist, inept, misogynistic, unknowledgeable, unstable buffoon.” “Inept” might be a little subjective… But the rest? Spot on.

      And as far a “my opinion not changing things,” you may be right. But this post keeps getting shared, for whatever reason. So far, about a quarter million people have read it, so it must have struck a chord with at least a couple people. Maybe you should write a blog post of your own detailing all of the things that qualify Trump to fly the plane, and see how many people read it and share it… Instead of creating email addresses so you can very bravely/anonymously comment and troll people’s posts. Is this the same email you use post on those white supremacist pages?

      You remind me of the sort of person who does this sort of stuff… https://theboeskool.com/2016/07/20/leslie-jones-and-what-to-do-when-racism-makes-you-want-to-give-up/

      Are you?

      • Jon Stewart says:

        I like adjectives you used for Trump. Spot on. Bafoon is my favorite, seems to fit his hair best. 🙂

        However, just to play the Devil’s advocate, who do you think of when I only say say the two words, “corrupt politician”? Eliot Spitzer maybe? But probably not. 😉

  39. Gerry Yurkin says:

    Oh yeah!!! Well answer this question, “yes” or “no.” HAVE YOU STOPPED BEATING YOUR WIFE???

  40. Tressa says:

    Wow!!! If the investigation into her email proving she told her daughter that it wasn’t a video doesn’t prove she lied to the American people then what does it take??? Why in the world wouldn’t the Secretary of State receive classified emails on her one server??? She fourth in line at the top!!!! It’s part of her job description!!!! Why would the fbi point out all the things she did wrong then let her off if she’s not guilty. If I’m caught not wearing my seat belt but I just forgot or I have a tail light out and didn’t know it should a cop be allowed to give me a ticket???? Really she’s corrupt as all get out!!!! Why is Trump called angry, racist, inept, misogynistic, unknowledgeable, unstable buffoon ? There are many videos of her being angry! How many people of color has she employed? Inept, really he has a very successful business!! Misogynist, he hired a woman to run one of his company’s back when most women didn’t get that chance!!! Just because he made a comment about a few specific women does not make him misogynist!!!! If so listen to some of Hilary’s comments about her husbands women!!!! His children’s ethics and success speak for what kind of man he is!!!! If he’s I knowledgeable and a buffoon why is he so successful!!!! He’s not a politician which to me is a good thing ! Those silver tongue people have proven they can’t be trusted!! He hasn’t taken others money so he can’t be bought!!! He’s proven he can get things done!! Why wouldn’t anyone want the government to change!!! They spend our taxes on stupid stuff and nothing is getting done because no one is accountable!!! Why wouldn’t you want someone in who would make each department accountable!!! Even Bernie has called her out on these things!!!! She’s corrupt as all get out !!! I wanted Ben but hey I’m a rich white republican racist !!! Not!!!!! I just pay a ton of taxes and don’t have the privilege of deleting other perception!!!!

    • theboeskool says:

      Congratulations, Tressa! That was the most exclamation points I’ve ever seen in a paragraph… You did it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Jon Stewart says:

        Yay! I love exclamation points too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  41. Box says:

    I will not be voting for Hillary. What happened in Benghazi was awful. I do not agree with most of her political platform and has been part of Obama’s ineffective presidency, including the healthcare mess of Obamacare. Personality-wise she is not near as likeable as Obama and lacks her husband’s charm. I have not liked much of Obama’s political decisions but when listening to him I find him very likeable. I know this had little to do with ability to be an effective president but it is hard to vote for someone without social warmth. Trump’s statements make me cringe sometimes but I will say Trump carries a charisma she just doesn’t have. Right or wrong Trump has the charisma to get an audience listening. Personality aside Clinton has a polical track record I am more than unpleased with. I for the most part do not like her politics. I naturally have somewhat more conservative values that just do not seem to align with her politics. Trump’s speaking style is poor, blunt and unpolished at best. He definately does not speak like a politician and is certainly not “politically correct”. I do not like his manner of speech and find he could get his point across without being offensive. However overall he has been an extremely successful person in business and when speaking to people that know him on a personal level he does not come across as portrayed in his speaking style. I like his platform of Make America Great again…I am not even sure what Hillary’s is. So hers obviously is not sticking. I would like to hear less emotionally charged statements and more thought and precision in what Trump says. He is not a groomed politician, obviously ;). But he also doesn’t carry the same political baggage as Mrs. Clinton. I know what she is already and what she will do. I do not like it. Quite honestly I am curious and willing to take a chance on a sucessful businessman than what I really do believe is a corrupt politician at this point. I just wish he was much more thoughtful in his speeches. Its a tough year for this.

    • theboeskool says:

      You’re right… What happened in Benghazi WAS awful. And not her fault.

      Also, actually Trump’s speech was less listened to than John McCain’s speech in 2008.

      In addition, if you can look at Donald Trump’s demeanor, words, and actions and graciously and hopefully overlook them–all while demonizing a woman like Hillary Clinton, you were NEVER going to vote anything but “Republican.” They could put up the Grand Wizard of the KKK, and you would vote for him. So stop feigning some sort of rationality for your decision. It is tribalism. Period.

      • ddukeblu says:

        So well said. The speech by Trump is such a reminder of the days when Hitler came into power. History teaches us to learn from the mistakes of the past. Trump wants to take us back to the past…and the past he desires is not a good opinion for minorities or woman.

    • Dana says:

      The only political baggage Clinton has is false baggage WE all loaded upon her, either by lying about her or believing the lies.

      Same as the crap people loaded onto Obama. Even the birther thing was ridiculous. You don’t actually have to be born in the USA to be a born citizen. You just have to be born to American parents, which one of his was.

  42. Why is it the Republican’s seem to have forgotten that in 2007 Bush deleted 9 upon thousands of emails after it was brought to their attention that they had been sent on “THEIR” personal servers????
    POT vs. KETTLE????

  43. Dena Silver says:

    Brrrrillliant. Thank you for clarifying what we all sense has been in the air for too long.

  44. Dale McLeod says:

    It does not matter if what she has done is labeled illegal. Fact: She deleted e-mails, used a personal server for classified correspondence, did not have enough brains to see there was adequate security for our ambassador, takes money from countries that treat women like furniture and kill you for being gay, defended the rapist of a 12 year old girl, smears women that have spoken out about her husband’s ill treatment of them, and has been on the public dole for decades! And don’t forget the scams she was involved in! And she is someone we can trust to protect our country???? Aha,ha,ha! Only sheep will do that!

    • theboeskool says:

      I love that people complain about Hillary “taking money” from families in countries that are anti gay… All while they work to try to elect a person who is actively working to take away the civil rights of gay people in this country. It’s cognitive dissonance at its finest.

      • Jon Stewart says:

        Hypocrisy doesn’t abnegate hypocrisy. Sure it’s stupid and shows incompetence or a lack of knowledge, but it doesn’t make the statement about it any less valid.

        #HillaryAndTrumpForPrison2016 #WillSmith2K16

    • Dana says:

      We had a President (just prior to this one) who deleted a hell of a lot more emails than Clinton ever did, plus sat on his hands when he could have prevented 9/11 (per Rice’s testimony before the Commission), plus invaded countries under false pretenses (even with the invasion of Afghanistan, the Taliban had offered to turn in bin Laden) and killed a whole bunch of Americans and civilians in the process. Also she had to defend that rapist, it was legally required. Criminals are entitled to an attorney, read the freaking Constitution sometime. And have you ever been the partner of someone who strayed from a relationship or a marriage? Did you feel sorry for the person they cheated with, or were you really angry at them?

      Crawl back under your rock.

  45. Lora says:

    There are people who are still convinced OJ is innocent too.

    • Dana says:

      There’s actual evidence that OJ is not innocent.

      The people who’ve investigated Clinton WANTED to find something wrong. You know, usually when they WANT to find something wrong, IF there is something wrong, they DO find it.

  46. Pingback: Why, in the face of all the facts and absence of evidence of wrongdoing, do people insist that Hillary is corrupt? It’s more about them than about her. – politiwonk

  47. Joel says:

    The reason the FBI director didn’t recommend charges is because he found no criminal intent in what she did. What she did, in fact, was negligent, so said the Director. It was just that she didn’t do it for criminal reasons. And THAT’s why she’s not getting hung out to dry, NOT because she was innocent of doing what she did. But here’s the thing: Half the country is getting ready to vote in a person as President of the United States who, exclusively, mind you, negligently handled secure documents – 30,000 of them.

    When I was in the military, I was charged with a few classified publications. In my training before being charged with their handling, I was told that if I even left it out on the desk in view of eyes of shipmates who did not have clearance to see them, criminal charges could be brought against me. And God forbid if one of them went missing! No mention of whether I criminally intended to leave the pub on my desk while a non-eyes only person saw it or not.

    She was the Secretary of State for the country, using non-secure technology in non-secure countries, and using them EXCLUSIVELY. She wasn’t a Third Class Petty Officer on a small ship with 76 crew in Little Creek, Virginia, checking out one publication from the technical library.

    And THEREIN lies the corruption.

    • Dana says:

      So did Colin Powell. So did Condoleeza Rice. Funny thing, a lot of us who are screaming about Clinton now would have wanted Powell to run–would have in fact crossed the aisle to vote Republican where normally we wouldn’t have.

      ALSO, she ASKED the NSA for a secure Blackberry to do all her work on and the NSA turned her down. Oh that’s all right then, she could have just chosen not to do her job at all. How would THAT have suited you?

      And you need to look up the word “corruption”, you seem a mite confused.

      • Jon Stewart says:

        Wow! Good to know if my job doesn’t provide me with the proper tools I should just do my job improperly!

        Gonna go tell the surgeons down at Park Nicollet that when their assistant doesn’t show up to sterilize their scalpel it’s no big deal and they can just use the pocket knife in their back pocket.

        Bacterial and fungal infections! Yay!

  48. Dana says:

    I don’t hold her responsible for the crime bill or for welfare deform either. Why? Simple–SHE WAS NOT PRESIDENT. I don’t care what she supported, her words meant exactly jack and squat at the end of the day. SHE WAS NOT PRESIDENT. I had opinions about things like that back then, big deal though because I was not President either. And that was TWENTY YEARS AGO. Anyone can change their views in that amount of time–hell, I can think of things I believed FIVE years ago that I no longer believe now.

    And when it comes to things she did as Secretary of State let me just remind the class that SHE WAS NOT PRESIDENT. She was WORKING for the President and believe you me, if she was going against anything Obama wanted, and made a POINT of going against things Obama wanted, Obama would have FIRED her. So whatever “her policies” were during that time, they were actually OBAMA’S policies. Funny thing though, we re-elected him!

    So I’m basically not seeing a lot of good reasons at this point to NOT vote for her.

    • Jon Stewart says:

      So let me get this straight, I can run for any office position and support the most corrupt and horrible ideas but so long as I’m not president it doesn’t matter? Got it.

      I think I’ll run for Mayor of NYC and propose a Hunger Games system, then once I’m elected Governor of NY I’ll recommend a national “Purge” day be instated! But don’t worry, once I run for president I’ll just say all of that was nothing because I wasn’t president! Oh this is a dream come true! Thank you!

      • Jon Stewart says:

        Oh no wait, excuse me, you said it was people she was working for that came up with these ideas and because she worked for them it was OK that she supported them.

        Glad I got that cleared up. Now I know when Trump becomes president and starts the Hunger Games or a Purge and I’m all in favor of it I can simply say “I wasn’t president so it doesn’t matter” when I run for the next presidency.

        🙂

  49. John Leisenring says:

    HillLIARy Clinton did break NUMEROUS laws in the email scandal. Ignoring this and calling her honest is insane and ludicrous.

  50. Libertarian says:

    Any of you Liberals care to explain the WikiLeaks emails that were leaked last week? Both parties are corrupt. How could any Bernie fan vote for Hillary when the entire DNC was plotting against your candidate??? Seriously? Consider third party for the sake of our country. We have enough corruption as it is!

  51. Le says:

    Interesting rant but you over look the Fact that it is Treason to even put the US at Risk of attack. By using an unsecure server Ms. Clintiin is simply guilty of treason, that’s defined as extremely reckless, btw.

    • theboeskool says:

      Wow, the republicans who held those eight different hearings (where they found her guilty of nothing) should have just called you, so you could explain it all to them. THEY were looking for any hint that she was responsible for the deaths of the four people who died… Turns out they should have just accused her of Treason! They might have called you to testify, except that (like most people who post ignorant posts on the internet) you don’t write your real name. I suppose that’s smart though, just in case you have to say something racist that get you fired from your job. But thanks for explaining it: “Simply guilty of treason.” Got it.

      You know what? Just in case you’re not picking up on the satire (even though I’m laying it on a little thick), here’s what I’m really trying to say: You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. None. And judging from those two sentences you wrote as a starting point, it would literally take years to get you up to speed. So just trust me when I say this: You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

  52. DV says:

    You’re really fucking stupid lol along with these other stupid fucktards blowing smoke talking about shit you have no clue about and never will because you’re all just another little citizen that the government doesn’t give a fuck about but feeds you bullshit bc they know you’re stupid enough to believe it. You really are an idiot lol

  53. jbevens says:

    Where there’s smoke, there’s fire when it comes to the Clinton’s. If I ha set up my own private server and handled top secret emails as Hillary Clinton did, I would be in prison. Since she is a connected Clinton, the FBI director changed the law to involve “intent” as an overriding element. Her history from Watergate forward had been one of lies, vicious attacks, and turning elements of society against each other for political gain. She IS the evil known as Hillary Clinton and must be defeated at all costs!

  54. I was going to share this article, but I’m afraid to just knowing the damned annoying psychology of how this works. The title contains the words “Clinton’s Corruption”, so what happens when people see it? Even though the whole article is devoted to DENYING that corruption, “Clinton’s Corruption” is what gets reinforced.

  55. Nur Sharpe says:

    No matter what you believe to be true, the fact remains that if Trumph is elected, America will become the laughing stock of the world, there will be the danger of him putting his little finger on the nuclear button that will destroy the world, and if not the kkk will open up shop ion your neighborhood mall. If you idiots in your shacks think somehow by voting for him you will get richer by osmosis, we’ll let me tell you, you will probably lose your food stamps for food or probably in your case, have less money for your sigarettes. You will never crawl out of your ignorant hole.
    Ignorance, in my opinion is a four letter word. I would have preferred Bernie, but so it goes.
    You want a better country! Try education and hard work and get your ugly ignorant head out of your stinking ass. And just so you know, my mother was brought up Muslim, my father a Protestant and I’m Buddhist. These comments I am making are not very Buddhist like of me, but I am sick to death of ignorant people. Get a life, get educated and again, take your heads out of your asses you Natzi wannabes!

  56. Mike Bisceglia says:

    I can see that position. It is not right to tell the person who doesn’t feel they are an alcoholic that they are just in denial. That doesn’t work. But, when you have video of them being drunk literally everyday, when they lost their job because they came to work drunk everyday and finally caused problems and got caught, when they had their kids taken into protective custody because the children were thought to be in danger when the parent went to jail after being arrested a fourth time for DUI, even though they got off on a technicality the previous the arrests this arrest is on dashboard camera video, and they are now unable to stand up barely conscious alluring their words reeking of whiskey and trying to explain again that they are not an alcoholic…at what point do you say, “your denial does not match your record.”?

    With Clinton, she has become so brazen and brash about it that after this most recent alcoholic episode she finished by inviting the bartender over to the house to honor her and reward her with praise and ceremonial title.

  57. Not Going To Read Or Reply To Anything After I Post This says:

    Let me start this comment off by saying I am NOT endorsing Trump. Trump is absolute garbage, complete and total trash. But this article is a farce. Their argument against people attacking Hillary and saying she’s a liar is “look they’re calling her a liar even when she denies it or skeptical evidence says she didn’t do it, therefore she must not be a liar because she denied it and they use that as proof of her being a liar.” *She literally lied on national television about her emails, her support/denial of NAFTA, all of her grandparents being immigrants, and being under sniper fire in Bosnia (and probably a lot more I don’t know about).* And the last paragraph in the article is beyond pathetic – possibly the most hypocritical piece of writing I’ve ever seen in my entire life. “Let’s pretend Hillary did do all of these egregious acts and got away with it; what a stand up person, that’s a true politician – a liar, a fraud, a snake, let’s applaud her for not getting caught. What an amazing example for our country – lie, embezzle, cheat, and don’t get caught, or at the very least, have enough money and political power to worm your way out of it.”

    And of course people will ignore everything I’ve just said and say, “Well she’s better than Trump!” Well I’m not voting for Trump. I don’t care about Trump. However I’d rather vote for an asshole than an equivocator. And sure, we all know Trump has lied too. But he’s just a businessman, not a politician. At least he didn’t lie about and mishandle classified and top secret information in a manner of “extreme negligence.” I prefer my liars to only affect themselves rather than our national security, thank you (and yes, you may get back to me if Trump wins the election, lies, and puts our country in jeopardy).

    I’m not even attacking Hillary’s political agenda. Nor am I even saying Trump’s political agenda is better or worse. I am leaving their political side completely out of this. I’m only talking about her personal character (or lack thereof) and the hypocrisy that flows through her veins. Do not reply to this comment saying, “At least she does this, or at least she does that.” Again, I don’t care about what she’s good at or about Trump so don’t make comparisons to him because I know he sucks too, this article isn’t about Trump, it’s about Hillary. And touching more on the topic of hypocrisy, I find it ironic that Hillary is all for equality (after openly stating she was against it at one point) but the Clinton Foundation is accepting millions of dollars from countries that persecute gays, lesbians, Jews, and Christians, and treat their women like property (per PolitiFact).

    “And I still think she’s corrupt. And I still plan to vote for her.” – mihipte, first post on this thread.
    Like, really? You know she’s that corrupt and you still plan on voting for her? You want a pathological liar in office? Really? Talk about ignorance. Wow.

    • mihipte says:

      Normally I would vote Libertarian, or potentially Republican if they got a particularly good candidate. But I decided during the Republican primaries that it’s my duty to vote for anyone standing opposite Drumpf. I see in him the potential for atrocities against illegal immigrants, black folks, and Muslims, and I’ll take whatever cronyism Hillary can dish out rather than find out whether I’m right about him.

      And I really hope we get a good candidate next election, rather than evil and lesser evil, because I’m not sure liberty can survive much longer in this political climate.

  58. Pingback: For Those Convinced Of Clinton’s Corruption | Screaming Back at the Screen

  59. Kelly says:

    I wanted Bernie. But now I’m with H. Shes the best qualified. She will appoint good judges. And the things Bernie fought for some are in her platform. He got reform in the DNc. If she isn’t beatting Trump, all that and more is gone

  60. Josh says:

    All I read was blah blah blah, Hillary lies less than Trump, blah blah blah, Hillary is better at dodging charges than Trump, blah blah blah…We’re all screwed!

    • Gary Spaulding says:

      I have read through all these replies and Trump is vilified with all kinds of fancy words but can anyone spell out with facts & figures just why he is so bad? I have listened to him speak many times and he may be a little rough around the collar but he lays out the facts and solutions to them and not a lot of political double speak.

  61. Scott says:

    She is guilty. The fact of the matter with the server and hacked emails is, should she have been charged but it would’ve taken down the entire executive branch. Any government official who exchanged emails with Hillary on a non secure system would also be charged. Period

  62. BTonder says:

    theboeskool,ironically, I think jbevins put his/her finger on the answer to “And I’m not even sure why” (I don’t really like Hillary). It’s the “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” concept. Experience tells us that there’s at least a grain of truth to negative accusations. And with the barrage of negativity that’s been leveled at Hillary Clinton ever since she appeared on the national stage as the career woman FLOTUS (who wasn’t content to stay home and bake cookies), it’s no wonder some of it stuck. And hey, she’s human; she’s made mistakes. Enough for people to go “See! Told you so!” It’s unfortunate, but in this sense, those who were out to get her have won, in that many people who would otherwise agree with her on the issues feel slightly uneasy about supporting her.

    • mihipte says:

      This is slightly off-topic, but who the heck is jbevins? I can’t find that name on this page.

      I agree with your point, although I think some of the allegations are solid enough to stand up without additional evidence. But I won’t bother mentioning them; I’m restraining myself a bit because I (paradoxically) actually want her to win.

    • M Yoder says:

      Exactly. It even worked on me. I was first able to vote in 1988, and so I’ve spent my entire adult life hearing all sorts of terrible things about Hillary. I never really believed any of them, but I realized I still had all sorts of negative feelings about her. Psychological tricks are powerful.

  63. Mike Johnson says:

    Even Al Capone was not convicted of his true crimes, but was finally caught on lessor charges. Give me a break !! If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and acts like a duck, sooner or later it will quack !!!

  64. Joey Gonzalez says:

    I will “vote my conscience” as they say. If Bernie is out, then #JillStein2016 it is. This whole two party thing needs to become a thing of the past. Even Mexico has more than two parties. MEXICO!

    The American people are better than this election. It’s time for us to clean house. If we don’t like the two candidates that are getting the most media attention, we need to know that there are other options. We will not be made to feel less for making our voices heard in a third party.

    In keeping with the beliefs and political positions that I will stand true to, I will choose Green at this time. They best align with what I feel is best. If your beliefs bring you to another party and candidate, then feel free to cast your vote for them. But, when I say I am #NeverHillary, #Never Trump, and that I refuse to be coerced into voting AGAINST a candidate out of fear rather than for someone I believe in, you need to allow this to happen for me because it is my right as it is yours.

    • Bill Carter says:

      Although I agree with you. How can you throw away your vote? I mean if there were a Snowballs chance in Hell your candidate could get elected that would be one thing. Reality dictates though that in order to impact the system you pretty much have to go with Trump or H Clinton. If there were anyone and I mean anyone who could blast through the pack and get elected at this point I might join in your fight. I like David Patreus for example. I have thrown his name out there to my friends and yes even my foes. Alas we are a small group of dedicated intelligent voters. Maybe next time we can get him into the race as a candidate. Raise the money needed to inform the electorate but that is the next election cycle. This time we have to decide between the two worse candidates to come down the pike since Nixon/McGovern. That is today. Starting now though we have to start looking at the next cycle. Both the RNC and DNC are corrupt. They have their own agenda not the people’s in mind. They think themselves a benevolent parent. The actions by both this cycle show just how little they respect or intelligence and desires. So let’s get through this election cycle. I guess hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. At the same time, start now in developing who you want 4 years from now. The Tea Party had a good start until they started to take over the Republican Party. We don’t need to take over something that is too corrupt to repair. We need to form our own futures with the “Fresh Blood of Patriots”. Good luck my friend. I wish you well. Your heart is pure.

    • theboeskool says:

      It is your right. And it is my right to equate your vote for a candidate who will not win one state to a vote for Deez Nutz.

  65. Rich says:

    I love how we have a nation of federal prosecutors who seem to know how to prosecute better than the career professionals that do this for a living.

    But here’s the thing. Lost in all of the navel gazing over whether Mrs. Clinton should or should not have been indicted is the fact that if the FBI/CIA/NSA were to prosecute every single perceived violation of the law over handling of classified materials, we would empty out the Departments of State and Defense of the large majority of senior administrators. We have a massive problem in this country over how we classify, store, maintain, handle, and dispose of classified material. If we had a Congress that was worth a damn, they’d be having their hearings over that than conducting partisan witch hunts.

    We still haven’t learned a single thing from Snowden.

  66. I have read this article, and while it makes some very great points, there is much I disagree with. She has perjured herself to the FBI, and that is on record, no matter how they chose to handle it. The rigging of the election by the DNC to ensure her nomination, was criminal. Her hiring of Debra Wasserman Schultz after all of that is at the very least confusing. Her refusal to release the transcripts of her paid Wall Street speeches is wrong. Her refusal to engage in a debate here in California was a slap in the face to all Californians. It was doubly wrong given her statement that the would debate anyone at any time. There is just too much there for me to trust her. I support my friends in whomever they choose to vote for…I will fight for that right till my dying days. Mrs. Clinton, however, has not earned my vote at this time.

  67. Pingback: For Those Convinced Of Clinton’s Corruption | The Boeskool | Rationally Thinking Out Loud

  68. Michael Pickle says:

    I disagree with her on all of her stated policies. Whether she is trustworthy or not is beside the point. If she is honest about what she intends to do, then I oppose her because I have examined her positions and have concluded that they are not in the best interests of either the nation or myself; on the other hand, if she is lying and does not intend to implement those policies, then I wonder what she is going to do. Either way, I am still not voting for her.

  69. Lynn says:

    I was actually starting to empathize with your point until your dumb comment about most trump supporters wanting laws to put more brown people in jail. As a Trump supporter who is surrounded by Trump supporters, I have only met 2 who might fit that statement. Now I see your arguments against Trump to be as ignorant as the claims you incinuate upon me.

    • M Yoder says:

      Please read Michelle Alexander’s book “The New Jim Crow”. You may not specifically want more brown people in jail, but if you support strong “law and order” policies, it’s pretty much only brown people who end up getting caught by such policies.

      Ironically, Bill Clinton is the worst villain in that book for dismantling the welfare system and hugely increasing enforcement and emprisonment for the “war on drugs”.

  70. Sebastian says:

    Plain and simple she cant be trusted how the hell do you ignore the flip flopping and all of the gosh dang lies! And dont even get me started on BENGAZI…. I am all for a woman president but not this one. Remember kids just say no to Killary.

  71. Katie says:

    I wish I could make my family read this post. Can’t see any way Tomane that happen, though.

  72. Don says:

    You people are a riot! I love watching blind people try to describe what a sunset looks like. (That is a metaphor. For those who know what one is.) You see, for every poll, or statistic, or report the news puts out for us to see, I can easily go find one that will say the complete opposite. Here is the cold hard facts. Even the liberal media has, time and time again, shown her lying to the American people. The FBI, though they did not charge her, admitted she lied. Not once, but many, many times. Now, I’m not ignorant enough to believe that Trump is a shinning example of pure honesty. That would be just crazy. I am a veteran of the U.S. Army, so I have fought for you to have your right to express your opinion, but please. PLEASE!! For the sake of everyone you love, for your country, don’t fall in line and make your vote on what you see or what the news tells you. Don’t be sheep. Investigate the person you think should be the next president. Do it with open eyes, and an open mind. Voting Hillary into office will only hurt our country more. I have done the research. I know just how corrupt and power hungry she is. She does not care about you, your values, your family, or this country. Not unless you can put a significant amount of money in her pocket. That ladies and gentlemen are the cold hard facts. Like them or not.

  73. m. kman says:

    What about her & Slick Willy stealing 200k worth of art & furniture from the White House & causing 80k worth of vandalism when they left in 2000? That would be a felony for anyone else. It just proves they are above the law & have the media in their pocket. This is just a small example of the Clintons criminal behavior.

  74. larry says:

    voting for hillary is like leaving your kids with casey anthony

  75. Michelle Staley says:

    I felt that she was innocent all along. Hillary has had presidential aspirations for several years and was not going to put jeopardize her chances to be POTUS. She was also found innocent on the Benghazi bombing. I will be very proud to vote for Hillary Clinton in November.

  76. Del Robey says:

    Well… all I can say is this…… if you truly believe that Hillary is SO righteous, you then need to vote for her. But,with all the corruption that Is coming out about her turns out to be true…..Are you still going to stand up and say” See, I told you SO” . I listened to all the hype about Obama’s first term,and still voted for him. During his first term I had to find myself apologizing, over and over again,because he did not stand behind his conviction. The second term I listened to him berate Hillary on every turn of her promises. Now, after all this exposure of her corruption,obama stands by her side,with nothing but praise about her. It just shows me the corruption of the Democratic party is SO deep, we will live up to Abraham Lincoln famous statement of how this great country FAIL…..by the uncontrolled powers within our government….. IT’S your decision…. I pray you make the correct one… instead of the corrupt One.

  77. Alden Wilner says:

    The election is won or lost in the Electoral College. Not at the ballot box. This is a subtle distinction, but it does mean that a vote for a third party is **not** necessarily a vote for or against either major party’s candidate. If you are in California, and would have voted for Donald, then, by all means, feel free to vote for Gary. If you live in Kansas and would have voted for Hillary, then, go ahead, vote for Jill. Or whoever. And if you can find someone you trust who’s planning to vote for the shoo-in candidate, go ahead, make a deal to pair your votes to the 3rd party. Who knows? If enough states go 3rd party, no one will score the 270 they need to win, this thing will end up in the House of Representatives, and we’ll get Jeb!. (The ! is part of his name, y’know. Not an expression of happiness)

  78. What demented rubbish. If this were the first time the Clintons, Hillary in particular, were involved in something scandalous, we might gladly take the “innocent until proven guilty” approach. But to assume innocence of any wrongdoing, simply because the FBI could not put together enough evidence to recommend charging her with a crime is feckless and naive. I am not particularly interested in whether Hillary broke some administrative laws by having a private email server, even if it was outrageously incompetent for someone in her position to have done. I want to know why she felt the need to hide her emails in the first place, why she felt the need to delete them so they could never be recovered, and why she lied about her actions multiple times both to investigators and the public. It is logical and reasonable to suspect some wrongdoing, even if we are only able to speculate what it was. It is intentionally obtuse to say that because of the FBI’s controversial recommendation not to bring charges that Hillary must therefore be innocent of any wrongdoing.

    • theboeskool says:

      That’s what the republicans who keep accusing her of stuff are hoping. Which is the point of the article… SMH

    • Edward Thomas says:

      OK fair and if you want to know this about Hillary. Why didn’t George W. get such interrogation after he deleted 10 million emails from the server. How come nobody want to know that.. here is why. Republican hateful mean sore losing asses probably helped Bush destroy government property. How come there was never an investigation launched. They could have held old George up for decades him and the evil Chaney… republicans never are fare they are poor looser and they govern their way regardless what the will of the people is. they are just one big nasty bunch of white men. That Good Ole boy network, kkk! Hillary + strong Woman = republicans scared and vicious!

  79. Dorothy says:

    Bullshit

  80. spkliewer says:

    Thanks to all who in commenting on the post make the point of the post.

  81. Edward Thomas says:

    These haters who would rather see Hillary as the antichrist should STOP Throwing stones as if they are so virtuous and have never lied before. Stop throwing stones when you live in glass houses. So she misspoke of her experience in Bosnia big deal it still doesn’t make her this vilian the haters insist labeling her to be. I trust her way more than the Orange DT… when he speaks only 9% of what he says is somewhat true, 9% people and Hillary is 54% the truth. How could a real hater , lier, racist, un-empathetic, wouldn’t know the truth if it bit his ass, ignorant Donald Trump come out on top when asked who is more trustworthy, it’s like we live in the same yet very different places all at the same time. What would she have to do for you to leave the false accusations out, have a sex change? Hillary Clinton already have the biggest balls ever, especially bigger than Donald Trump, his followers and the entire Republican Party. I know not one of you idiots would endure the false lies mean spirited treatment that she has had to deal with her entire political career, no, your ass would have been done years ago scared tired, well you all are already those. Not one of you carry the strength of Hillary Clinton. She is a strong dedicated woman! Madam first lady, Congress woman, Secretary of state, President! I’m with her! When you haters go low we go high! Now let’s kick ass in November!

  82. Tom says:

    The media wants her to win. It’s very clear. Benghazi? Nobody says she wanted people to die. That is about negligence. The emails? Bad but not a deal breaker. The main problem with that is the constant lying on the issue even after Comeys testimony that what she has said all along is clearly and completely untrue. She’s just not honest and never has been. She will say ANYTHING to get elected. Trump scares me but she does too. I really want a woman to be President. Just not her please

  83. I guess you didn’t hear about wikikeaks yet. She also lied about not using classified material in her emails. She created civil war in Honduras, by ordering the coup of a democratically elected president, where hundreds of women and children have been killed; she gave her brother exclusive mining rights in Haiti after the country was devastated by a huge earthquake, he got rich, that money didn’t go to the people or to helping this country. They opportunistically took advantage of a country in turmoil. Saudis are contributing to her campaign, her arms deals allowed terrorists access to weapons and this isnt even all of it. Corruption.

  84. fejj Nosgoh says:

    Reading the comment section is proof of how screwed your country is.

  85. “It’s kind of like accusing someone of being an alcoholic, and then when she tells you she’s not, you say, “See? There it is… Denial.” ”

    Well when the police breathalyze her and she blows a .20, but they just refuse to charge her because she’s on the City Council, are we still expected to accept that she does not drink?

    Hillary Clinton’s career is littered with improprieties, coverups, and lies. We don’t have to accept that just because she has friends in the FBI.

    For God’s sake, she’s accepting millions of dollars every year from the same rulers of countries that are sponsoring international terrorism. What has the Clinton Foundation done as an organization to help the world that’s worthy of accepting money from mass murderers?

    Nothing.

    • th3platform says:

      You should look at the motivation of the Saudis giving her the most money (10-25 million). It’s because they are essentially paying for Huma Abedin to be Clinton’s closest advisor as a surrogate for political favors and to pressure Clinton to look the other way at the shady behavior of the Saudis. That does not even mention Abedin’s direct connections to terrorist organizations.

      • suranis says:

        Yes, its easy to educate yourself with a few mouse clicks. For example;

        “Saudi Arabia — and I get along great with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.” – Donald Trump in Mobile, Ala.

        Nice to see the Trump Konsolidated Keyboard Kommandos out in force.

      • th3platform says:

        By your logic, all news is completely false and unreliable. I’m not a Fox News acolyte. I read from many different sources.

      • suranis1 says:

        Yes I’m sure there are many, MANY different sources you look at; Russia Today, Infowars AND Brietbart.

        Which is why you know, as I do, that the Saudis didn’t contribute anything to the Clinton Foundation whole HRC was Sec of state. Yes. that’s $0. And that the same guy that claimed that the Saudis gave HRC $25 mill and that’s a bad thing, boasted of taking double that number from them himself, so taking $50 mill from the Saudis is a good thing when he does it.

        And that 25 mill was over 18 years, which equates to a massive average of about 1.5 mill a year. Assuming the $25 mill number is even accurate, as the only source for that number is the ever flapping lips of one Donald J. Trump, the same guy that boasts of getting $50 mill from the Saudis and that’s fantastic and he likes the Saudis.

        Please tell me again about how openminded you are and how you look at different sources. Now if you excuse me I’m going to watch France News 24. Ooh New York fined the Bank of China 215 mill for money laundering Violations. Cool.

  86. Brent says:

    The for-profit education business Laureate Education, which paid Bill Clinton some $16.5 million to serve part-time as “honorary chancellor” starting in 2010, a year after Hillary became secretary of state. Laureate, for its part, gave the Clinton Foundation some $1 million to $5 million. Nothing illegal about that, per se.

    However, the Daily Tennesseean reports that Blackburn’s letter also details how “the International Youth Fund, whose board members include Laureate’s founder, Douglas Baker, received more than $55 million in grants from the U.S. Agency for International Development while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.” AID is a part of the State Department.

    Then there’s Uranium One. Hillary Clinton, the Daily Tennesseean notes, “was one of several Obama administration officials who approved the sale of uranium to the Russian-operated company, whose chairman also has donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation.” A number of other people involved in the deal also gave money to the Clintons.
    “The appearance of ‘pay-to-play’ transactions involving Laureate and Uranium One also raises serious allegations of criminal conduct requiring further examination,” Blackburn’s letter says.

    That’s not all of the questionable activities.

    As we noted back in May, the Clinton Foundation took in some $100 million in donations from a variety of Gulf sheikhs and billionaires who no doubt expected to reap political benefits from a future Hillary Clinton presidency, with Bill serving not just as first gentleman in the White House but also possibly as bagman. Among donors dumping bags of cash on the Clintons include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

    Lost in the shuffle is Bill Clinton’s special “business partnership” from 2003 to 2008 with Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the strongman ruler of Dubai. That deal netted Clinton some $15 million in “guaranteed payments,” tax records show. And then there’s the $30 million delivered to the Clintons by two Mideast foundations and four billionaire Saudis. For the betterment of humankind, no doubt.

    As national security analyst and writer Patrick Poole said in May, “These regimes are buying access. … There are massive conflicts of interest. It’s beyond comprehension.”

    It took Wall Street financial analyst and investment advisor Charles Ortel — whom the Sunday Times of London once described as “one of the finest analysts of financial statements on the planet” — to untangle the mess in a series of ongoing reports. Ortel alleges that contribution disclosures by the foundation often don’t fit with what donors’ own records say — big red flag.

    “This,” Ortel summed up, “is a charity fraud.”

    As a reminder, this isn’t just some political vendetta. As far back as 2013, an alarmed New York Times warned that the foundation had become “a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest.”

    It turns out that’s a gross understatement.

    Testifying to Congress, FBI chief James Comey called Hillary Clinton “extremely careless” about her use of a private email server while secretary of state. But, curiously, he refused additional comment “on the existence or nonexistence of any other ongoing investigations.” This needs to be disclosed. Americans deserve to know whether the person they’re likely to put into the White House this November is merely a misunderstood career public servant — or a pocket-lining career criminal.

    • Suranis says:

      If you are going to copy some crap you downloaded from a website as your own work, at least give them attribution. I found example of this being passed around verbatim since at least 2015, bar of course the lies about the Email investigation at the end.. Hell in January it was being attributed to Charles Krauthammer. That was quickly debunked http://www.snopes.com/krauthammer-clinton-foundation-laundering/ <– same letter.

      Thank you for passing around a crappy chain letter. That requires less effort than thinking.

      In the real world, the independent Charitywatch website gives the Clinton foundation an A rating, with 88% of its income being spend on its causes. That means that for every 100 million people say its embellishing, 12 mill must go back to the Clinton's… minus administration, rent, salaries, utilities, fundraising, legal fees, etc etc etc… Feel the greed.

      Its almost like we have their tax returns or something to prove it.

      https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478

  87. John the 3rd says:

    This is the MOST DELUSIONAL PIECE OF WORK I’ve ever read about Hillary Clinton. Even Chelsea’s father-in-law is a crook, having embezzled $10M from friends, family and institutions while waving the Clinton flag. It’s obvious that the authors of this piece enjoy the ostrich farts they spew; pay to play may the the ‘norm’ (per the DNC) but corruption will, WILL destroy democracy; IT ALWAYS HAS and the Clintons are as corrupt as any family this side of the Mafia.

  88. Jackie says:

    Donald Trump will win! Especially with Hillary’s health scare it just keeps getting worse for her just deplorable for her.

  89. Let ne says:

    Ok…let me ask. How many people did the Mob kill? How much crime did they commit??? Hmmmmm….they were convicted of very little bit we still all know they did all those things. The clintons…. mob family of the past 50 years….seriously! Don’t be gullible!

  90. Monkey15 says:

    Crooked Hillary

  91. Monkey15 says:

    You tube this “must watch Hillary Clinton tried to ban this”.
    Then judge for yourself
    These are her words
    True trump is a butthole but most politicians are. His views are closer to democratic views than republican. The media lies for Hillary!

  92. Monkey15 says:

    And she farts at 7:22. Those are her best most honest words.

  93. John says:

    James Comey is the head of the FBI, which is a presidential appointee, and approved by congress. Having been a public employee for a while, I can tell you that a person in an appointed position will say and do almost anything to keep that appointment. So by not indicting but admonishing Hillary, he sets himself to retain this position no matter who wins

  94. Allen Wells says:

    I finally got a chance to watch Hillary’s America and I’ll be honest I was sick to my stomach I knew she not honest but this goes beyond honest this is downright Criminal this person has absolutely no morals no integrity and no ethics if anyone who watches this and still votes for her will show there true color.

  95. Brian says:

    Bosnia? Her stupid fib about landing under fire in Bosnia was certainly a small act of fear and hubris, but c’mon, you and everyone you know has made similar stupid fibs, without actually having been in a terrifying situation like landing in Bosnia. This little fabrication wouldn’t even register on the Trump-o-Meter, where the lies are of such grandeur and majesty, magnificent frequency and awe-inspiring absurdity that mere mortals cannot hope to compete.

  96. Betrayed says:

    You had me until you started bashing. I was going to delete anything I retweeted about either candidate, but then I saw the same things that is firing everyone up.
    No the FBI cant prove corruption or anything else cause she deleted everything and made sure they were untraceable. I dont know what is truth anymore from so much deception by so many, but I do know DNC chair resigned for corruption against Bernie. I think you may want to research a little further, and if something comes out that cant be covered, they will blame it on Trump, alt right, Russia, sexual deviant, or some alien 77 billion light years away I am sure. I suppose it was trump that colluded against bernie with the DNC too right? We are not all republicans hating on the other party, some of us feel betrayed by the party we once stood up for and sent countless hours calling, polling, and assisting campaigns.

  97. Lennie Joseph says:

    Hillary is guilty of nothing. She has been dragged through the mud by Republicans that are afraid of what she has on them. It’s tge same trick they did to Bill, and n ok President Obama. Leave her alone, elect her and let her do her job.

  98. C. Simon says:

    What a lot of phony rationalization to justify votes for Hillary:
    Reality Checks:
    1. 30 + yrs in “public service” (she counts being maried to elected official in that).
    2)She’s coveted the wealth of just about everyone she meets.
    3. She has long, proven record oflies scandal and manipulation from awhitewater Travel Gate, to mysterious deaths of numerous associates, Bosnia, Benghazi, using private server AGAINST THE LAW purposefully yto hide anything that might reveal illegal/unethical doings while Secretary of Stein anticipation of running for President 2nd time. She also was caught red-handed stealing State gifts, furniture, and national property like silverware upon moving out of White House! Further she and her staff vandalized White House before succeding President moved in by such deeds as removing keys from typewriters, etc. Talk about greedy, petty, immature, arrogant, STUPID! Oh, don’t forget entitled!
    4) She blatantly lied to families of dead and to every US citizen in concert with spokespeoplein Administration about Benghazi and refused security despite 600+ requests from the Ambassador and his office and abrogated all duties to her staff there despite a 13-hour. attack.
    5) As Senator (as Carpetbagger Senator- never lived NY in hour lifeuntil she saw opportunity to snag position atdeath of Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
    6) Hillary lies with impunity and continually without second thought to cover herself. Again, and again, and again, and again, and again and will continue to do so.
    7) After losing Presidential race once, she and husband and team of insiders corrupted DNC, IRS, White House, State Dept., and worst of all the Justice Dept. of U.S! What makes YOU FEEL SAFE and that YOUR RIGHTS ARE SAFE???!!!
    8) It is now without doubt that she enriched herself by illegally selling out her own country whili in nat’l office and the Foundation is a ruse to do so as well as a vehicle to enrich friends and financial supporters. Contrary to popular claims that it does “wonderful work around the world!(just for start ask Haitians who were still living in tents in most recent hurricane!
    9) Very small portion of donations actually goes toward charitable work, and the bulk goes to hugely inflaated salaries, travel (like private plane travel for Clintons–remenber we tax payers give ex-Presidents security, huge sums of money, pensions, etc. etc, and that is nowhere near enough
    for Clintons!
    10) Skipped tons more Clinton transgressions but time and space limited.
    11) Donald Trump can be big mouth jerk sometimes but unlike both Clintons, he does not money let alone steal money from everyone and their brother and sister, whereas nothing is enough for the Clintons!
    12) What of substance has Hillary achieved in all her yrs.besides a couple of pcs. of legislation nqming a couple hi-ways?
    13) Hillary’s “qualifications:” Politics, Pollitics, Politics.
    14)Donald Trump’s real life experience and qualifications: lifetime of achieving, building, fulfilling business goals reliably and profitably.

    Don’t take my word for it. Or this blogger’s rationalization for bad behavior.
    Educate yourselves; it’s as easy as typing a few words into search engines and clicking!

  99. John says:

    18 USC 1924
    You are wrong!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s