"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claims that she used a personal email account to conduct official business as a 'matter of convenience,' and says doing so was a mistake."


It will promptly be swept away by the lap dogs in the 'mainstream' media.

With her, personal ambition always trumps EVERYTHING else.

She pretty much made it worse for herself today.

Introducing President Elizabeth Warren.

She had an amazing 30,000 emails in 4 years as SoS! I would guess that this incredible number includes both Inbox and Sent folders.

Tech question… Can you have more than one email account on a cell phone? If so, why would it be "inconvenient" to have a second email on it? IDK, maybe the government insists the .gov accounts have to be on their own separate cell device.

She said all of her emails sent to/from .gov emails are archived because they are on the government system. But doesn't a SoS correspond with other people who do not have .gov email accounts? Dignitaries from other countries come to mind...

TedSheckler;1711642 wrote:She pretty much made it worse for herself today.

Introducing President Elizabeth Warren.

Ugh....that would be the end of the United States as we know it.

TedSheckler;1711642 wrote:She pretty much made it worse for herself today.

Introducing President Elizabeth Warren.

It's no secret that Warren is more in line with the policies of BHO than HRC is. It wouldn't surprise me if the White House had something to do with these problems Hillary is having…

Apple;1711666 wrote: Tech question… Can you have more than one email account on a cell phone?

Of course you can. I have 5 email accounts on my phone.

Apple;1711702 wrote:It's no secret that Warren is more in line with the policies of BHO than HRC is. It wouldn't surprise me if the White House had something to do with these problems Hillary is having…

I think this is all actually coming from Hillary's camp, well ahead of the election and before she's even officially entered the race. Get the dirt out now so it's old news by the time it comes to vote. And, of course, the liberal media is playing right along acting outraged now, but in 12 months they will circle the wagons to defend Hillary and diminish the scandals.

Its hard to believe that bald face liars like Hillary Clinton who was exposed on video tape as one is even considered as a candidate for president in this country. Even worse a front runner in a major political party.

I have no energy for any more Clinton shenanigans. I don't want any more Bush's either. Is this the best we can do?

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1711884 wrote:I have no energy for any more Clinton shenanigans. I don't want any more Bush's either. Is this the best we can do?

We have several examples of HRC shenanigans.....Bengazi, e-mailgate, etc, etc

What shenanigans have come from Jeb Bush??

It wouldn't surprise me if BHO is behind the revelation about the email account to the press. No secret that Dear Leader and the Clintons are not the best of friends. Timing seems right given that if this takes HRC out of the race, his preferred candidate, Warren, will have more time to get her campaign up and running. Plus, the email debacle is all on HRC and he is pretty much out of the picture on it. Add in that the House investigation into Benghazi is being run by the R's, it looks like the R's are the ones who are the ones working to take her out.

Conspiracy theory, yes. But not beyond belief given similarity to Chicago style political thuggery.

^^^ - well stated. And certainly Warren is much more the Marxist ala obama. This is the conundrum: what is worse; a radically liberal candidate of the Marxist mold who would continue the 'fundamental transformation of America'; or a liberal democrat whose personal ambition and desire for power trumps honesty, integrity, morality, and accountability?

That we have to face that choice illustrates just how far we have fallen and how sick this country is.

Over 20 years later, and more relevant than ever:

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/08/opinion/essay-blizzard-of-lies.html


Required reading as we head back into a Clinton campaign.

Her explanations for the private email just don't add up. First of all, she's on tape talking about carrying two phones in the past. Yes, it's annoying but everyone also knows you can put more than one email on a phone.

Then saying she deleted private emails and won't turn over her server. It all smells like she has something to hide. My guess is, at minimum, it's the typical quid-pro-quo of fundraising/lobbying...which would still sink her presidential bid.

That fact is, I think this was a deliberate attempt to escape scrutiny and FOIA requests. She better dare not ever utter a word about transparency on the campaign trail.

gut;1712350 wrote:Her explanations for the private email just don't add up. First of all, she's on tape talking about carrying two phones in the past. Yes, it's annoying but everyone also knows you can put more than one email on a phone.

I would think one of her staffers that go with her everywhere could carry one of them for her.

queencitybuckeye;1712361 wrote:I would think one of her staffers that go with her everywhere could carry one of them for her.

Hey Hillary ... Belly35 has 4 emails accounts on his one phone and he can also pick up faxes and send faxes (to help with the spelling and grammar he use a voice thing app .... Maybe Belly35 should be President

Dead Americans in Benghazi and still no answer from your cell phone … incompetency mofo… Must be that Obama phone

queencitybuckeye;1712361 wrote:I would think one of her staffers that go with her everywhere could carry one of them for her.

Sure. And I don't know if you can have a second, personal email account on a govt phone. But millions of business users have been stuck carrying two phones and they don't have the same strict rules/regulations about their email.

I think she also said she carried a tablet. It's all ridiculous. She has her purse to carry all her shit (or her assistant). And that leaves several pockets in her pants suit free to carry a couple of phones.

There's simply not a defensible excuse. The only explanation is she did it deliberately to evade FOIA/Congressional inquiries....and one simply is not allowed to have "discretion" over what they turn over in those matters.

And we're supposed to believe someone in the foundation/political business purges emails? Nobody takes the time to do that. If she doesn't delete it after reading, her assistant probably catalogs where it's then kept for eternity because it a waste of time to try to later filter and purge.

gut;1712370 wrote:The only explanation is she did it deliberately to evade FOIA/Congressional inquiries....and one simply is not allowed to have "discretion" over what they turn over in those matters.

It depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

"When the phone rings at 3AM, who will answer it?"

Not Hillary, she doesn't carry a govt phone....you'll have to text her private email.

wkfan;1711927 wrote:We have several examples of HRC shenanigans.....Bengazi, e-mailgate, etc, etc

What shenanigans have come from Jeb Bush??

None that I am aware of. I'm just tired of Bushes as well as Clintons - for different reasons. The ironic thing for all of us is that these two ruling families are all best of buddies.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1712504 wrote:None that I am aware of. I'm just tired of Bushes as well as Clintons - for different reasons. The ironic thing for all of us is that these two ruling families are all best of buddies.

You see...I have an issue with people who are 'tired' of something that the person being judged has absolutely nothing to do with.

While I have not decided that Jeb Bush is the best republican candidate to run for POTUS, so simply dismiss him because of his last name is a travesty. Decide if he is worthy of the nomination based on his character, his experience and what he stands for...not on the basis of those in his family who have gone before him.

This line of thinking is akin to saying that all southern, rural whites are racist rednecks just because some of them are...or that all blacks are thugs....just because some of them are. Generalizations of this type are very dangerous and very unfair, IMO.

Does this perjury thing have legs? Very odd that neither Hillary nor the State Dept will answer a very simple question.

Interesting opinion piece and comments section in the WSJ from last evening concerning the HRC SoS's email situation and the law.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ronald-d-rotunda-hillarys-emails-and-the-law-1426547356

This story is not going away any time soon.

Apple;1713746 wrote:Interesting opinion piece and comments section in the WSJ from last evening concerning the HRC SoS's email situation and the law.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ronald-d-rotunda-hillarys-emails-and-the-law-1426547356

This story is not going away any time soon.

What's funny is I did a search for that topic to find another side of the opinion....not a single left-wing source on the first two pages of Google search. Not one, not even to make fun of "Faux News" for reporting it.

I guess, at the end of the day, they really don't want Commisar Warren to run.

wkfan;1712512 wrote:You see...I have an issue with people who are 'tired' of something that the person being judged has absolutely nothing to do with.

While I have not decided that Jeb Bush is the best republican candidate to run for POTUS, so simply dismiss him because of his last name is a travesty. Decide if he is worthy of the nomination based on his character, his experience and what he stands for...not on the basis of those in his family who have gone before him.

This line of thinking is akin to saying that all southern, rural whites are racist rednecks just because some of them are...or that all blacks are thugs....just because some of them are. Generalizations of this type are very dangerous and very unfair, IMO.

I have no problems with anybody being sick and tired of "Clinton" or "Bush". In fact, I'm rather sick of seeing both families in power myself.

We, the US, have no business flocking towards a nepotistic form of monarchy whatsoever. We've already been there and done that with the Bush's. We don't need to continue awarding them with that power.
In the case of the Clinton's, we don't need to continue this with them, either.

Both families just need to find hobbies, go hang out on the beach, form charities or some sort of philanthropic ventures. ANYTHING but politics. It's time for them to just... go.