Hillary Clinton: Unfit for Office

[bendog]

It's amusing (to me) to see the "shock and disappointment" in Hillary being secretive. LOL Cheney tried to keep secret Enron's role in writing energy policy by cooking the books on WH visitors, but he was a mere piker compared to the Clintons.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

To say she broke a rule you first have to prove that she did, which so far, no one can. Start there please.

Hillary broke the Law.

The Law that was introduced by a House Republican, passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS ... 2 YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

she didn't get caught speeding in 2013 either.

A law that she broke, passed after she was gone? Care to clear that up for us?

 

[Dot Com]

yeah she's unfit for office... so when she wins that won't be saying much for the Republitards will it?

beat two times in a row by a guy from Kenya, and pretty soon by a woman who is unfit for office .. that must really suck.

LMAO

I'm no HRC fan but yeah, that would be fun/funny

 

[The Rabbi]

It's amusing (to me) to see the "shock and disappointment" in Hillary being secretive. LOL Cheney tried to keep secret Enron's role in writing energy policy by cooking the books on WH visitors, but he was a mere piker compared to the Clintons.

Did Cheny violate any laws or regulations with regard to keeping emails or other records? If so provide proof.
Your attempts at moral equivalence are pathetic but just what I'd expect.
How do you justify keeping Clinton as the presumed Dem nominee in light of all this?

 

[PratchettFan]

How can anyone, liberal or conservative, defend Hillary's actions with regard to her server? First she maintained a private server for her emails against gov't regulations. Then she did not turn over the emails to State when she left, again in violation of the rules. Then she gave a news conference and lied about it, maintaining she didnt want to have two devices. Not only did she run two email accounts on one device, it came out she had a second one anyway. Now it turns out she probably deleted emails AFTER a House committee notified her they were investigating.
This is nothing other than obstruction of justice and evidence tampering. If she has so little regard for law now, and has had a 40 year history of such behavior, how can anyone support her for President?

Doesn't impact me one way or the other.

By that token you shouldnt be posting here at all since 99% of what we discuss doesnt impact you.
You arent disturbed that the front runner for the Dem nomination is basically a criminal?

I meant it doesn't matter to me. It's a non-issue. Certainly not a criminal issue by any stretch of the term. At the very most, she violated some internal department rules. I would think the Sec of State has more important things to do than read the SOPs on emails. So it bothers me not even a tiny bit.

 

[Siete]

To say she broke a rule you first have to prove that she did, which so far, no one can. Start there please.

Hillary broke the Law.

The Law that was introduced by a House Republican, passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS ... 2 YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

she didn't get caught speeding in 2013 either.

A law that she broke, passed after she was gone? Care to clear that up for us?

seriously?

that was sarcasm for the benefit of the RW's ..lol

the RW's are trying to prove something that she couldn't have done when she was in office ... get it ?

stay tuned.

 

[The Rabbi]

How can anyone, liberal or conservative, defend Hillary's actions with regard to her server? First she maintained a private server for her emails against gov't regulations. Then she did not turn over the emails to State when she left, again in violation of the rules. Then she gave a news conference and lied about it, maintaining she didnt want to have two devices. Not only did she run two email accounts on one device, it came out she had a second one anyway. Now it turns out she probably deleted emails AFTER a House committee notified her they were investigating.
This is nothing other than obstruction of justice and evidence tampering. If she has so little regard for law now, and has had a 40 year history of such behavior, how can anyone support her for President?

Doesn't impact me one way or the other.

By that token you shouldnt be posting here at all since 99% of what we discuss doesnt impact you.
You arent disturbed that the front runner for the Dem nomination is basically a criminal?

I meant it doesn't matter to me. It's a non-issue. Certainly not a criminal issue by any stretch of the term. At the very most, she violated some internal department rules. I would think the Sec of State has more important things to do than read the SOPs on emails. So it bothers me not even a tiny bit.

Really? Obstructon of justice, a key point in Nixon's impeachment btw, doesnt really matter to you? Is there anything Hillary could do that you think would render her unfit to be the nominee?

 

[DarkFury]

To say she broke a rule you first have to prove that she did, which so far, no one can. Start there please.

Hillary broke the Law.

The Law that was introduced by a House Republican, passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS ... 2 YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

she didn't get caught speeding in 2013 either.

The law dealing with tampering with evidence has been around longer then Hillary. SoS does NOT have it's own laws and Hillary is held to the SAME laws and standards as any U.S. citizen DESPITE what SHE thinks or says.

 

[The Rabbi]

To say she broke a rule you first have to prove that she did, which so far, no one can. Start there please.

Hillary broke the Law.

The Law that was introduced by a House Republican, passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS ... 2 YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

she didn't get caught speeding in 2013 either.

A law that she broke, passed after she was gone? Care to clear that up for us?

Simple
National Review
Now, are you going for the moron's default of "It's National Review, what do you expect?" Or are you going to admit she probably committed a felony?

 

[Theowl32]

Well to be entirely fair to the morons on the left who would vote for such a creature, they do not give a damn.

In all fairness to that smelly ***** known as hillary, every last ******* democrat is unfit for office.

 

[PratchettFan]

How can anyone, liberal or conservative, defend Hillary's actions with regard to her server? First she maintained a private server for her emails against gov't regulations. Then she did not turn over the emails to State when she left, again in violation of the rules. Then she gave a news conference and lied about it, maintaining she didnt want to have two devices. Not only did she run two email accounts on one device, it came out she had a second one anyway. Now it turns out she probably deleted emails AFTER a House committee notified her they were investigating.
This is nothing other than obstruction of justice and evidence tampering. If she has so little regard for law now, and has had a 40 year history of such behavior, how can anyone support her for President?

Doesn't impact me one way or the other.

By that token you shouldnt be posting here at all since 99% of what we discuss doesnt impact you.
You arent disturbed that the front runner for the Dem nomination is basically a criminal?

I meant it doesn't matter to me. It's a non-issue. Certainly not a criminal issue by any stretch of the term. At the very most, she violated some internal department rules. I would think the Sec of State has more important things to do than read the SOPs on emails. So it bothers me not even a tiny bit.

Really? Obstructon of justice, a key point in Nixon's impeachment btw, doesnt really matter to you? Is there anything Hillary could do that you think would render her unfit to be the nominee?

I see no evidence of that. But no, I see nothing which renders her unfit to be the nominee. If that is who the Dems want to run, they should run her. That's how the process works. Hopefully the Republicans will run someone who can beat her. Though I am not encouraged by the crop so far.

 

[Theowl32]

I basically agree with the OP, and I am strictly anti-conservative. But I've always viewed the Clintons as professional neo-con politicians.

The Clintons are Grifters. Why ANYONE who cares about America would want them in office is beyond explanation.

Well, the "caring about America" comment is rhetorial gibberish, since "America" is defined quitely widely and variously. Some very powerful people still model American labor based upon slaveholder rights.

Aaaand the moron went to the slavery card.

They were freed in 1865. Maybe you did not learn that in school.

 

[bendog]

To say she broke a rule you first have to prove that she did, which so far, no one can. Start there please.

Hillary broke the Law.

The Law that was introduced by a House Republican, passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS ... 2 YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

she didn't get caught speeding in 2013 either.

The law dealing with tampering with evidence has been around longer then Hillary. SoS does NOT have it's own laws and Hillary is held to the SAME laws and standards as any U.S. citizen DESPITE what SHE thinks or says.

I'm not a Hillary fan, but I have not seen any reputable site saying she broke laws.

Back in the 70s, I was really anti-Nixon, but only because he seemed intent on keeping that war going until I was of draft age. But, over the years, I've come to think that in actual accomplishment terms, and challenges his admin faced terms, he looks pretty damn good compared to any post-WWII potus. He was not personally a crook in terms of taking money for personal gain, and frankly I don't think the Clintons are either.

I'd prefer the Ohio Governor, but .... Hilary beats a clown.

 

[Kondor3]

Nixon didn't burn all of his tapes....

Just sayin'.

And now, instead of the "Missing 18 Minutes", we have the "Missing 18 Months"... not good.

 

[g5000]

The Clintons have been redefining sleaze on a semi-annual basis for over two decades.

Hillary's emails were under a Benghazi (fauxcons: regurgitate mouth foam here) subpoena at the time she blitzed her server. She had turned over something like 55,000 State Department emails under that subpoena, but common sense would dictate that one not wipe their email server clean during an open investigation.

Unless, of course, one had something to hide.

It will be for the lawyers to decide if laws were broken, but that won't stop a lot of unschooled parrots from copying and pasting no end of bogus legalistic claims about Hillary Clinton in the months and years ahead. I anticipate writing many posts debunking an Everest of manufactured bullshit from the Right which will ensure the truth will never be known, and that is extremely frustrating. The tards never learn that the Truth is far more fatal to someone like a Clinton or an Obama than a mouthful of bullshit. The tards never learn that the Clintons and the Obamas of this world thrive in the gutter.

Whatever the case, Hillary Clinton has demonstrated she is just as slick as Willy, and the Democrats are pretty stupid for not having a better and more viable candidate to offer.

Unfortunately Hillary, like Obama, has the unprecedented good fortune of being opposed by people even more unscrupulous, dishonest, and hypocritical than herself. So, incredibly, she actually has a fighting chance of surviving all of this!

 

[candycorn]

She'll make a good President. Can't wait for the election.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

To say she broke a rule you first have to prove that she did, which so far, no one can. Start there please.

Hillary broke the Law.

The Law that was introduced by a House Republican, passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS ... 2 YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

she didn't get caught speeding in 2013 either.

A law that she broke, passed after she was gone? Care to clear that up for us?

Simple
National Review
Now, are you going for the moron's default of "It's National Review, what do you expect?" Or are you going to admit she probably committed a felony?

Well, you have a rather serious problem, since the emails were turned over, regardless of how and why, even if untimely, what you now have to prove is that something that should have been turned over wasn't, and that it was wiped “willfully and unlawfully”.

Good luck with that, you're going to need it. If the email admin just decided to blow the server, or Hillary said I have everything I need from it so wipe it and you can't prove that she knew what was left should have been turned over, that is the end of that.

 

[Kondor3]

yeah she's unfit for office... so when she wins that won't be saying much for the Republitards will it?

beat two times in a row by a guy from Kenya, and pretty soon by a woman who is unfit for office .. that must really suck.

LMAO

LMAO, that someone with a long and well-documented track record for involvement in corruption scandals, and strong-arming, and, now, obstruction of justice, and, perhaps, contempt of Congress, has attained the highest office in the land?

Let me guess... you're a foreign 'plant' and fifth-columnist, doing your own little bit to help weaken the United States, right?

I don't know what other explanation there can be, for supporting such a person for high office.

Unless... I suppose...

You're a member of a political party that has been reduced to one-trick-pony status, and has nobody else (suitable) warming up in the bullpen...

In which case, such unfortunate partisans end-up trying to defend the indefensible...

When it gets that bad... such folk oftentimes end-up putting party before the welfare of the Republic, even if they didn't start off in that mode.

Somehow, I'm not surprised.

 

[Dot Com]

Is this STILL about:

 

[Kondor3]

Is this STILL about:

OK, now that was damned funny...