Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, January 16, 2019

Same as it ever was. Once again, according to pundits on the influential Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit, Hillary Clinton is in deep trouble. The National Bitch Hunt is definitely on. Surely you didn’t think we could have a female presidential candidate without one?

Rolling down the highway, listening to Diane Rehm’s NPR talk show last week, I wondered if I hadn’t driven into some kind of weird political time warp.

In a sense, I had.

“Someone said the other day that Washington may now have reached the state-of-the-art point of having a cover-up without a crime,” pronounced the Washington Post. By failing to come clean, Hillary had managed “to make it appear as if the Clintons had something to hide.”

“These clumsy efforts at suppression are feckless and self-defeating,” thundered the New York Times. Hillary’s actions, the newspaper continued, “are swiftly draining away public trust in [her] integrity.”

OK, I’m teasing. Both editorials appeared over 21 years ago, in January 1994. They expressed outrage at Hillary Clinton’s decision to turn over Whitewater documents to federal investigators rather than to the press, which had conjured a make-believe scandal out of bogus reporting of a kind that’s since grown too familiar in American journalism.  (Interested readers are referred to Joe Conason’s and my e-book The Hunting of Hillary, available from The National Memo.)

However, by failing to roll over and bare her throat, Hillary Clinton only “continued to contribute to the perception that she has something to hide.”

Another joke. That last quote was actually The Atlantic’s Molly Ball on the Diane Rehm program just last Friday. It’s the same old song, except that Ball was complaining about Hillary’s turning her email server over to investigators looking into a dispute between the State Department and the CIA about which documents should have been classified, and when.

She should have turned the gadget over six months ago, Ball opined.

Ah, but to whom? There wasn’t a State Department vs. CIA dispute back then.

No cage filled with parrots could have recited the list of familiar anti-Hillary talking points more efficiently than Rehm’s guests.

The email flap, opined the Times’ Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “creates and feeds into this narrative about the Clintons and Mrs. Clinton that the rules are different for them, that she’s not one of us.”

Most Americans, she added indignantly, “don’t have access to a private email server.”

Actually, most Americans don’t know what a server is, or why the hardware is supposed to matter. Then, too, most Americans have never been Secretary of State, aren’t married to a former president, and don’t enjoy Secret Service protection at home.

Stolberg saw a perception problem too. Nobody was rude enough to ask her about the perception caused by the Times public editor’s conclusion that her own newspaper appeared to have an axe to grind against the Clintons after it falsely reported that the emails were the object of a criminal investigation.

They are not.

Stolberg also complained that both Clintons “play by a separate set of rules, [and] that the normal standards don’t apply.”

Which normal standards? According to, yes, the New York Times:  “When [Clinton] took office in 2009…the State Department allowed the use of home computers as long as they were secure…There appears to have been no prohibition on the exclusive use of a private server; it does not appear to be an option anyone had thought about.”

So why are we talking about this at all? No Secretary of State previous to Clinton had a government email account.

Bottom line: when they start talking about narratives and perceptions, these would-be insiders, they’re talking about themselves.

But leave it to the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza, who’s written about little else lately, to sum it all up with classic wifebeater logic. Hillary’s emails, he told NPR’s audience, “remind [voters] of the things they don’t like, the secretiveness, the paranoia, the sort of distrust….And then I also think it just feeds the perception that she is a candidate of the past. Do you really want to go back to this? Yes, the Clintons bring many good things. But they also bring this sort of baggage, this stuff that always follows them.”

See, if Hillary would just quit fighting for herself and her issues, they could quit ganging up on the bitch. Meanwhile, this has to be at least the fourth time the same crowd has predicted her imminent demise, if not indictment and conviction. All based upon partisan leaks (this Trey Gowdy joker is nothing compared to Kenneth Starr’s leak-o-matic prosecutors) and upon presumed evidence in documents nobody’s yet seen.

From the Rose Law Firm billing records to Benghazi, it’s the same old story. Because when the evidence finally emerges, it turns out that Hillary has been diligently coloring inside the lines all along.

And that’s because she’s smarter and tougher than her enemies — the very qualities that drive them crazy.

Photo: U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton arrives for a campaign town hall meeting in Claremont, New Hampshire August 11, 2015.   REUTERS/Brian Snyder 

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 0

225 responses to “Why Hillary Clinton Drives Her Enemies Crazy”

  1. Dominick Vila says:

    Excellent article. The only thing I can add is the ignorance that prevails among so many segments of our population about classified information, the classification process, how the information is labeled, and how it is handled. Having dealt with classified information during much of my life, I find this “scandal” nothing short of amazing. The fact that so many people don’t understand the ongoing dispute between the State Department, the Inspector General’s Office, and some national security agencies regarding whether or not some of the information sent or received via Mrs. Clinton’s personal server should have been labeled classified, and handled accordingly, is surprising to me. The Secretary of State has the authority to determine what is classified and what is not. If Secretary Clinton decided the information was not classified, either because it had not been labeled as such, or because in her estimation the information was not sensitive, she was within her rights to handle it as she did.
    Obviously, she would have been better off using government mediums instead of a personal server, if nothing else because she should have known that those who could not defeat her on merit were going to go after her persona, and her record or decisions, to destroy her because of who she is and what she represents to those whose idea of governance and qualifications are limited to I am qualified because I am an arrogant, narcissistic, and loud bigot.

    • Harbinger08 says:

      My understanding is that the government email network was notoriously slow, unreliable and insecure. Which is the reason so many opted for other systems, such as a seperate server, which could be protected and maintained. This seems another manufactured scandal over nothing, like accusing someone of hiding something because they lock their car.

    • Carolyn1520 says:

      It’s that ignorance of not only this process but so many others that allows the right to spin so many “scandals”. They depend on their followers being as uniformed and ignorant of the facts as possible. If not for that fact, their party would have crumbled by now.

    • FT66 says:

      Well stated Dominick. Those who don’t understand how the system works, think Hillary had the power to classify or unclassify any document so long she was Secretary of State. It doesn’t work that way. You hear now from Fox that more than 300 documents while FBI going through them, they are tagged and entitled to be classified. For god’s sake they were not classified then when Hillary was still working. I do wonder any layman on street get the real meaning of this emails saga when they hear those on Fox News talking.

      • Dominick Vila says:

        Lost in this whole argument is the Constitutional authority of the Secretary of State, and its scope, as fourth in line to the presidency. Presidential Succession Law of 1947:
        Vice-President
        Speaker of the House
        President pro-tempore of the Senate
        Secretary of State
        The fact that only referrals are being sent is not an accident…

    • LinGin says:

      Edward Snowden hacked into the official government servers. This is my reply to these “email talking points.” Shuts people up quickly.

      • Dominick Vila says:

        And so did Pvt. Manning. The difference between this pseudo scandal, and what they did is that they, deliberately and without the necessary authorization, sent sensitive information to expose our security resources, capabilities, and thus undermine our national security. I guess this is the GOP response to outing a CIA agent, Valerie Plame….Oops, wait, we are not supposed to talk about W!

        • The lucky one says:

          Both Snowden and Manning revealed instances of criminal behavior. In the bizarre world of US “justice” they are now the ones being held accountable while the criminals they revealed remain unpunished.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            We have been doing a lot of questionable things for many decades in the name of national security. In most cases, our actions have been designed to support our goals and protect our interests. I am not sure that listening to Angela Merkel’s phone conversations fall in any of those categories, but it highlights the scope of our snooping.
            In any case, both Snowden and Manning had an obligation to abide by the terms of their security clearances. Their decision to deliberately and willfully disseminate sensitive information that not only embarrassed the United States, but that revealed the extent, scope, and capabilities of our national security resources was a criminal act.
            Should we abandon our practices, and let our foes undermine ours? I guess that depends on what side of the fence you are in. We live in a dangerous world. Might as well accept the reality of our circumstances, and do the best we can to maintain a minimal amount of morality and humanity within the realities we live in.

          • The lucky one says:

            Indeed the world is a dangerous place, much more so due to the rogue and illegal acts of our government. As I understand
            it Manning did try to go through proper channels and was rebuffed. Where is the prosecution of the officers who knew of the illegal acts but ignored them?
            Surely they will claim that they are abiding by their obligations to their orders. That’s very familiar to the excuses heard from guards in concentration camps. Manning is proof of the old saying of “Show me a hero and I’ll write you a tragedy.”

            Snowden’s case is a bit more complex but had he tried to reveal the illegal acts being committed in any other way we would have never heard of him because he would have been “suicided’ or met with some other kind of untimely demise. He certainly didn’t act out of avarice and that is part of the reason our phony leaders have condemned him so strongly. Greed they understand, patriotism and love of country is foreign to
            them as is any emotion apart from their own narcissism. Congratulations to Snowden for escaping the clutches of an evil government that surely would have crushed him if possible and still might one day. I’m sorry that Manning was naïve enough to think he would receive justice here.

    • utopia27 says:

      I’m a Democrat. I actively campaigned (within the restrictions of the Hatch Act) for Pres. Obama twice. I participate in state and local Democratic Party activities (again, within the restrictions of the Hatch Act).

      It pains me to say that this e-mail thing is for real – it’s bad news. I’m a government IT professional – held clearances and operated both classified and unclassified IT systems for DoD and DHS (among others). Secretary Clinton’s need to shield her e-mail from political witch hunts overrode the good judgement required by the Secretary of State. It was fabulously poor judgement.

      Again, it pains me to say it, but speaking honestly and from professional experience, this e-mail thing has legs.

      • Dominick Vila says:

        I have acknowledged several times that she used very poor judgment when she decided to use her personal server instead of using government systems.
        I do question, however, the claims that she sent and received classified information via her personal server. Most of what I have read thus far involves disagreement between the State Department and other government institutions as to whether or not some of the material she handled should have been classified.
        Having said this, there is no question that her candidacy has taken a major hit. The worst part is that this was totally unnecessary.

  2. What bothers me even more than the media sensationalists and right wingers who spout the Hillary hate, is the people who call themselves progressives and do it. If they put that effort into helping elect more Democrats to Congress, they’d be furthering their own cause, instead of furthering the cause of the Kochs and Karl Rove.

    • Eleanore Whitaker says:

      When you look at it right, the GOP wants control of women’s bodies. That way, they can control women and keep them always at the back of the line when the plum jobs and leadership roles are available.

      Hillary IS the biggest threat not just to the GOP bulls…but to all men in the US who have grown all too accustomed to being “HEAD of household” and getting first dibs on the caviar.

    • Carolyn1520 says:

      Same here. The far left tends to be as wacky in the same way the far right is.
      I’m supporting Hillary not only because I think she’s well prepared for the job but also because she’s smarter and tougher in a way that always puts her ahead of her detractors. Her experience in this ares alone is invaluable.

      • plc97477 says:

        I am supporting Ms Clinton because I think she is the only one able to win all the marbles.

        • FT66 says:

          I am supporting Hillary because I know she is being attacked unfairly. No one talks or is ready to revisit how previous Secretaries of State handled their emails. Does this mean one of the qualifications to become President you have to show how good you were in dealing with government secrets matters? If so, has anyone tried to ask those 17 GOP contenders how they dealt with emails? If not, why not? and why only Hillary? All of them together are seeking for the only one position: becoming PRESIDENT OF USA.

      • kalpal says:

        The far left is a figment of Bill O’Reilly diseased imagination.

        • Harbinger08 says:

          The far left is not an illusion. All 37 of them meet regularly in internet comment sections around the clock. You know the old saying, no matter where you go, there they are.

          • kalpal says:

            Much is made of this mythical group but I have yet to run across any of its members. The intellectuals who may be included in the “far” left never appear in broadcast media since the liberal media accepted Both-Siderism as a non-neutral gift to the mendacious RW.

          • charleo1 says:

            I have called it false equivalency. But I like “both-siderism,” a lot. Well said!

        • Carolyn1520 says:

          We disagree on that point.
          I know a few, up close and personal. They are the ones who didn’t get their campaign promise wish list met, wanted Bush/ Cheney prosecuted as though it was the first thing Obama should have focused on (not the economic cliff) and started whining in the first year of his presidency that he wasn’t dem enough for them. I’ve felt the same degree of disdain for their naivety as I have for the right wingnuts.

      • Harbinger08 says:

        The very qualities that detractors use to attack Hillary are precisely what demonstrate that she is a capable, pragmatic and effect fighter with loads of inside-the-ring experience and no illusions. She has gained all this the hard way, and is a far cry from the less cautious idealist that first walked face first into the Right Wing buzz saw with friendly hand extended. She is quite clear now who her enemies are. Sanders has good ideas that need far greater support from the public to get enacted, but the GOP goons and their bosses will tear him to shreds both in a general election and as a president if that were even possible.

  3. notbuying 911 says:

    Hillary for the pen 2015!

  4. latebloomingrandma says:

    The server was set up by a small mom and pop computer company, and was housed in a Denver condo in the bathroom; at least according to Morning Joe. The Secretary of State’s server in an unsecured area in a bathroom by people allegedly with no security clearances?? What??? To me, that’s the most disturbing thing of all. I can believe she didn’t know this, but why not? It comes down to a matter of judgment of how she makes decisions. The “vast right wing conspiracy” has been after her for years, and she remains paranoid,mostly for good reason. But paranoia is a dangerous way to govern. (Think Nixon) Thinking of the 8 Bill Clinton years and the constant investigations, waste of money for this, and no crime except extramarital, it makes me wary to think of a Hillary Clinton administration with the same soap opera,part II.
    And yet Hillary remains the best, most prepared person to be President. All I know is, we can’t have a Republican President if we want to move the country forward.

    • Bren Frowick says:

      What you shouldn’t believe is anything you hear on The Morning Joe…

    • Carolyn1520 says:

      Nixon did something wrong and Hillary has done nothing wrong. I don’t think she’s paranoid at all. Paranoia infers one falsely believes others wish you harm. There’s nothing false about her stalkers. Knowing what she knows about her detractors, it would be naive and stupid to think they are looking to treat her with any degree of fairness .
      She’s smart and she’s tough and her skills have been honed at having been treated as prey for so long. That alone gives her the edge over her opponents in my opinion.

      • DAK27 says:

        Exactly. When everyone is your enemy, then you treat everyone as your enemy… BECAUSE THEY ARE. That was Obama’s biggest mistake IMO, thinking the GOP would be fair. They didn’t have to like his policies, but they certainly didn’t even treat him as a human being, much less the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. By day 2, Obama should of told them all to kiss his backside and do as he saw fit and got on the news every single day and exposed ALL the GOP lies. Every. Single. Day. Beat that horse to death until NO ONE would listen to another lie from the Right.

      • CrankyToo says:

        In any case, even paranoiacs have enemies.

  5. DAK27 says:

    The GOP has told too many lies, too many times for me to believe them on anything. NOTHING any Republican says is worth the time it takes to hear them say it.

    As for the media, since the media gives a pass to any and all Republicans, no matter the transgression, I do not trust them either and no longer believe anything they say either when it comes to politics. We no longer have a free press, it is bought and paid for by the 1% and we all know which political party the 1% owns too…

  6. Eleanore Whitaker says:

    I find it interesting that the photo beneath the headline contains 2 men and 2 women. Look at their faces. Which are smiling? Which are scowling? Is Hillary afraid? No. Should she be? No.

    The reality is that for far too long men in the US have been unable to think outside their own gender. So, they often miss that women aren’t just equal to men, they are superior. This is the real reason the GOP bulls are doing a hatchet job on Hillary. She represents all in women these kinds of men hate most. She’s smart, won’t stand down and refuses to accept blame for things she is not guilty of.

    Every woman who has ever drawn a breath knows that masculine tactic of always blaming women even when they are more guilty of wrongdoing. Who has led us into wars most often? Who has taken over governments with such gusto? Who gets caught in the act and then looks around for a woman to blame?

    Men with pathetic minds believe no woman, no, not even their own mothers, can be trusted. Why? Simple. These are men with such massive guilt and lack of accountability that they automatically assume no woman can be trusted, because after all, they know they can’t be trusted.

    Not all men are like this. But, the ones who lust for power and money are. These are the ones who will bar the doors to advancement for women just to insure no woman ever gets ahead of them. An old old legacy and a song out of tune.

    • The lucky one says:

      “Not all men are like this. But, the ones who lust for power and money are.” Well thanks for the faint praise for a few of us inferior men.

      “women aren’t just equal to men, they are superior” How is that any different than a man saying the reverse of that?
      I do agree that Hilary is smarter than the majority of her opponents. Unfortunately she is no different than them morally.

      • Eleanore Whitaker says:

        I stand by my post as will many educated, accomplished, financially independent women.

        Women are superior. That line, by the way, came from a man, Noam Chomsky. What say you now?

        The fact is that men have ASSumed since they left their caves they are superior. But, the minute any woman says that…up go the burrs in male butts.

        The only reason YOU think Hillary is immoral is because that’s a typical Mr. MAN view of ALL women. Try cleaning up your act.

        Hillary and women like her play your men’s games YOUR way and then you call that immoral? And what would you have women in her position do? Act all cutesy, bow and curtsy? Bat her eyelashes?

        Superficial men always rise to the top of the landfill.

        • The lucky one says:

          Noam Chomsky is a brilliant man but that doesn’t mean he’s infallible. I don’t judge the merit of someone’s view based on their gender. No, I think she is immoral because of her words and actions. She is owned by the same kind of big money corrupters as her male counterparts. She is no better or worse in that regard. By contrast I believe you are often wrong or deluded in your opinions but I see no reason to suspect you of immorality.
          No HC doesn’t play games “my” way. I don’t lie, steal or cheat. That is the way of most politicians, again HC is no better or worse in that regard.

          • kalpal says:

            Noam Chomsky never asserted infallibility. That is left up to religious faithful who accepted such a notion in the 1870s after some cardinals declared a pope to be infallible in matters of faith.

            HRC learned how to survive in the political arena strictly because the RW attacked her and her husband since they made it through the 60s without becoming insane RW tools and fools.

          • The lucky one says:

            I know that Chomsky doesn’t assert infallibility. I was responding to Eleanore’s statement that implied that since she could choose a statement of Chomsky’s that agreed with her that settled the debate.
            HC, who started as a Goldwater acolyte survived in the political arena because she is very intelligent and possesses the same attributes as her opponents. She panders to big money, will say whatever she thinks her fans want to hear and is no friend of the environment or we the people.

          • kalpal says:

            In order to attain an elected office in this nation one must avoid the truth as ardently as one would avoid a Typhoid Mary. Pandering to the electorate is an absolute must.
            Mark Hanna who managed to elect William McKinley pointed out that there 2 very important things in politics. The first is money and he forgot the second. His great mistake was not encumbering Theodore Roosevelt and losing control of political patronage after McKinley was killed. Political corruption is endemic in this and every other country because politicians need and devoutly worship money but also because it is flattering to be offered gobs of money for hurting the public and betraying their trust.

          • David says:

            Except for Trump!

          • kalpal says:

            Not sure if Trump has ever met any truth. In his own world he is a dictator and must not be gainsaid on any matter.

        • charleo1 says:

          I usually enjoy reading your posts. But, if the Country thought for one second Hillary Clinton would become President, and govern from the perspective that woman are superior, she would lose by a landslide. The truth is, women have more men pulling for their equality in all facets of life, than ever before. Benefiting as they are, from a growing, and broad based consensus, that discrimination of any kind, against anyone because of who they are, is just wrong. So, be happier in the success of your cause for a change. And learn after years of no, when to take yes for an answer.

      • kalpal says:

        The difference may be between truth telling and lies designed to oppress females. Have you seen the GOP try to legislate anything restricting male behavior as often as they do concerning females. Even so the legislation oppressing females is mostly related to poor women since the well off can easily circumvent the laws passed by rich old impotent males intent on penalizing poor women for having the gall to indulge in sexual intercourse without a male overlord to act as their protector.

        • David says:

          What? Where did you pull this garbage out of — your anal cavity?

          • kalpal says:

            I think it was taken out of RW discussions of how everyone but the RW is a liar and that women have no business making decisions without the benefit of a male giving his imprimatur to her actions.

          • David says:

            Let us know when you come back from La La Land. Give us some examples of these “decisions”.

          • kalpal says:

            Lets start with the GOP declaring that nothing Obama will offer is to be passed. This happened the day after the election in 2008. Can we consider that a RW conspiracy? How about the Koch brothers astro turfing a tea party that is full of congenital idiots like you?
            Oh wait your RW blinders obscure reality and you can only see Faux truthiness and hear Limbaugh hate filled lies.
            Remember that FOX News is what Ailes America.

          • David says:

            Thank you for your thoughtful reply. The subject YOU raised was the GOP had created legislation oppressing females and with the RW “…that women have no business making decisions without the benefit of a male giving his imprimatur to her actions.” I asked for some examples of this conduct. Your response was the GOP opposed Obomo and the Koch brothers had a party for the Tea Party. Therefore, I was a “congenital idiot”. Hmmm…. If I was, then that could be an excuse for errors I make. What is your excuse for not being able to read, comprehend, and provide an answer to a question presented? I won’t call you an “idiot”, rather someone who is intellectually or morally challenged.

          • kalpal says:

            If you are truly unaware of the massive numbers of anti-abortion legislations then there is really not the slightest hope. Maybe you can hire a third grade kid to help you with some research.

          • David says:

            “Anti abortion legislations”? If you mean statutes enacted placing restrictions on when a fetus can be killed, then you have to identify which one or ones you are referring to, and that it was a GOP controlled legislature that passed it.

          • kalpal says:

            Sorry but I don’t participate in infinitely regressive games. You know full well that you are in the wrong which as a typical right winger makes you eminently in the right, right?

          • Brat Wingz says:

            <~~ third grader. Liberals do not pass restrictive abortion laws.

          • David says:

            True…they want them as broad as possible!

    • David says:

      Eleanore! Glad you are back! I have to say that I must agree with you, “Women are superior.” After all, they have 1/2 the money and all the p–sy!

      • Eleanore Whitaker says:

        There’s an old saying your post reminds me of…”Idle time is the devil’s workshop.” Women don’t have “1/2 the money.” Women, according to the US Labor Dept. Statistics since the 1920s, are paid less than men. So, how do women have ALL the money? Dig deep pallie…your pockets are likely lined with cashola you could only get by hiring women to work for you at 77 cents on every $1 you earn (The current rate paid to women according to the US Dept. of Labor).

        Get your mind out of the gutter. It’s a fact that men with too much money grow bored with having exhausted all outlets to spend and waste it and then find, POWER is all they have left to look forward to in their TOO RICH TO GIVE A SH..T lives.

        • David says:

          Didn’t say they had ALL the money. Said they have 1/2 of the money and ALL the p–sy! I certainly am not complaining. By the way, if I only pay 77 cents for every dollar that I earn, then I make a profit of 23 cents per dollar. Why would I want to pay more?

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            1/2 don’t have all the money…not even close. 52% of the US population according to the last census are women. Women work for 77 cents for every dollar a man works for.

            You are seriously math challenged. That 77 cents each woman earns gets taxed at the same rate as the $1 you earn..are you getting ANY of this?

            So, for that 23 cents women don’t get, you men get to spend 23 cents. For that same 23 cents, woman pay more for nearly everything from haircuts to the clothes on their backs.

            For that 23 cent loss, it means paying the same taxes you do; but, not getting back the same ROI.

            And no one pays their own salary..DUH. Boy are you dippy.

          • David says:

            Eleanore– I said that all women have 1/2 of all the money. NOT that 1/2 have all the money. You said that, “..by hiring women at 77 cents on every $1 you earn…”. Now, if I did that, that would give me a profit of 23 cents. But, of course, if I paid them $1 for every $1 I earned, then I wouldn’t net anything! Now, we all know that math is a subject women are traditionally poor at grasping. I can tell by your posts that you are somewhat challenged there also.
            Speaking about haircuts, how about that $1,200.00 one that Hildebeast got! She is a true champion of the middle class! Have a blessed day.

    • Carolyn1520 says:

      Eleanore, I almost always agree you but not on the “women are superior” aspect.
      Individually, yes and there are men individually who are superior to some women as well as other men. In terms of knowledge, intellect, common sense, physical strength, we all have our strengths and weaknesses. I know just as many stupid women as men and also women who climb the ladder and will kick the rungs off for any women who attempt to follow. They don’t want the competition either.
      Yes, women have a long way to go in terms of equal treatment but men in general are not the enemy, at least I don’t see them in that way. I’ve known quite a few men who aren’t threatened by women and willing to give them as many opportunities as they would any man.
      I think the good points you make are diluted by insulting men in general. You can tell me to go piss up a rope if you want but I remain on your side in the journey we’re all on.
      And after encountering Lounie, I understand where you come from completely.
      He’s a real specimen.

      • Eleanore Whitaker says:

        Carolyn, That was a quote from Noam Chomsky. My point is not who is superior. I insult any man who insults me. Sorry but I give as good as I get. I’ve lived my entire life since birth surrounded by men. I know practically every one of their strategies and tactics.

        There are three things I observed in 5 brothers and half brothers, 1 father and husband, 2 sons, 11 nephews and working in the virtually all male worlds of sales and marketing and engineering.

        1. Men, unlike women, are inherently selfish creatures. The degree to which their selfishness exists depends on the mother who raised them.
        2. Men absolutely have no concept of “fair.” In 68 years, I’ve yet to meet a single male who could play “fair” for longer than a month. Sorry…but that’s the truth.
        3. Men cannot see outside their own gender and develop an understanding of the fact that there actually is another gender.

        There isn’t really equality between men and women in terms of physical abilities at every level. Women know that. But, I agree that mentally women and men are equal.

        Women possess intuition. Men miss this inherent factor completely. It’s how a Mom knows her child is in danger even when he/she is miles away. Women are born with a natural sense of second sight that is superior to men’s.

        • David says:

          Eleanore…if by “superior” you mean that women are on top. Well, I will have to agree. I think that’s a great position for them to be in.

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            You wouldn’t thing men with “peanuts” in their jeans would have minds so low in the gutters. That all you have to think about all day?

          • David says:

            Eleanore — I have many things to think about. One of them is the humor I find in your texts. I have to admit that, at first, I thought you were serious about the things that you wrote. However, it finally dawned on me that it was all being said tongue in cheek. After all, no one would seriously believe the things you said, right? Have a blessed day in New Joisey!

        • plc97477 says:

          Men are also very territorial. Their women belong to them and they better toe the line. Unlike women who consider their husbands equals and treat them accordingly.

    • 788eddie says:

      Well, Eleanor, I’m a white, 60’s male who is also a registered Republican. My party, unfortunately, has been taken over by the right wing-nuts Tea Party. I can’t find anyone “on the clown bus” that I feel can be trusted with the Presidency, so this time around, I’m supporting Hillary Clinton. I think she’d make a fine President.

      I am also in agreement with a lot (but not all) of your commentary.

  7. kalpal says:

    That “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” crack is what damned her in their eyes. Telling any truth about the RW is a serious taboo and must be punished.

    • FireBaron says:

      “Whatever you say, say nothing when you talk about ‘you know what’,
      For if ‘you-know-who’ can hear you, you’ll know what you get!
      They’ll take you all to ‘you-know-where’ for you never know how long,
      So, for ‘you-know-who’s’ sake don’t let anyone hear you singing this song!”

  8. charleo1 says:

    Hillary herself accurately describing the e-mail/server flap yesterday, called it exactly what it is, pure politics. And, exactly what all of the other so called, quote, “serious investigations,” have been. Expensive witch hunts, that when all is finally said and done, which mark my word on this, will perfectly coincide with election day, 2016. Will amount to nothing but a puff of smoke, and a lot of hot air. But the beauty of it is, if it works, it doesn’t have to amount to anything. Just serve it’s purpose.
    Look, here’s the deal. We know, hell everybody knows the Republicans, or should by now. How they have absolutely no new ideas of their own. Or any solutions that make one lick of sense to anyone but that ignorant base of theirs, they constantly stroke to distraction. So this is how they roll. They glom onto something, anything, they, or their hired trolls can come up with. It doesn’t have to be a scandal. They only need to start calling it one. Calling it gate-something. Fixed News will start to cover it non-stop, 24/7. As if it were the second coming, or some such. Acting all the while as if they themselves are tremendously horrified, and disgusted, anxious to reach the, “truth.” As the GOP, and their propaganda apparatus, all now singing loudly from the same hymnal, do their damnedest to define their target with their non-story puffery, before the candidate has a chance to fully articulate her/his, platform. It’s called taking control of the message, and it’s as dishonest as the day is long. As in, we’re not going to talk about income inequality, the disappearing Middle Class, or a broken immigration system. Nor are we going to allow anyone else to talk about it. Especially not to our base. No, we’re going to talk about something Hillary might have done, that we have no proof she’s done. But something that we can shoehorn into a rehashing all the other false scandals invented about the Clintons over the years. And thereby re-creating a theme, or narrative. And of course we’re gong to continue to talk, and talk, and talk. Spending endless hours reporting on polls about Hillary. Preaching to their choir about their daily successes at undermining the trust of the American people in Hillary. Speculating when Biden or some other Democrat, will need to step in and rescue a Party that is now in deep trouble!
    Oh, we know Republicans, and their Fixed News. How a Country would never elect a wild-eyed Socialist. A Community Organizer. A Muslim, born in Kenya, and determined to take over the economy, and end American Capitalism.

    • kalpal says:

      Hillary’s political presence gives the GOP loose bowels syndrome. They have no one who can defeat her as of this point. By flinging mud they hope to adequately besmirch her but that may not work all that well.

      Swift Boat Veterans’ lies managed to sink Kerry’s candidacy but by now the public is familiar with that trick and it is unlikely to work again except with the Feeble minded base of the RW.

      • drdroad says:

        This is nothing new! How did they defeat Kerry? His polls went south when the Boone Pickens ‘he didn’t really rescue that guy in Vietnam’ campaign took hold. ‘Oh, Obama wasn’t even born in USA’. Al Gore said ‘I invented the Internet.’ GOP: If we can’t beat them, LIE/CHEAT!

        • kalpal says:

          Lies are the stock in trade of all Right Wingers. If you are not a fool or a liar you will be purged from the RW.

          • Theodora30 says:

            But that does not explain let alone excuse the complicity of the MSM in the process.

          • kalpal says:

            The MSM is about producing profits not about reporting reality. It is dangerous to everyone’s career in the media to point out RW lies to the public. The RW never forgives such actions. Truth is taboo in American politics and it will not be reported unless another source of income is present.

      • plc97477 says:

        Hillary is more of a fighter than Kerry. I don’t think it is going to work with her.

  9. FireBaron says:

    The New York Times has a history of “bad blood” with Hillary, despite their love affair with Bill. I take pretty much everything the Grey Lady says about her with a strong grain of salt!
    As for the rest of the Hillary Hater Squad out there, they have been spouting the same drivel since 1992. When are they gonna lighten up?

    • Theodora30 says:

      What love affair? It was the Times that hounded him into appointing an independent counsel after two Republican led investigations cleared him of any wrongdoing in Whitewater. Jay Stephens led the RTC investigation and found nothing but that was not good enough for the Times so Clinton had a special prosecutor – Republican Robert Fiske – do a second investigation which cleared the Clinton’s of any wrongdoing (they lost all their money for crying out loud!) but still the Times kept up the pressure until Ken Starr was appointed by a panel of right wing judges. The Times just could not stand it that we the people had elected some hick from nowheresville. All of these needless investigations were paid for by us taxpayers.

  10. John Murchison says:

    Funny, how media folks seem to be forever chasing their collective tails. Few of them seem to remember being duped into endless investigations the first time with the Clintons.

  11. Otto Greif says:

    Is there a bigger Clinton shill than Gene Lyons?

    • SophieCT says:

      Press treats Hillary like sh*t and has held her to different standards for 20 years.
      Hillary mistrusts press.
      Press says: See, SHE’s not trustworthy.

      The real question Otto, is: Could there possibly be a bigger shill for ignorance than you?

      • Otto Greif says:

        Lyons gets paid to be a Clinton shill, what’s your excuse?

        • SophieCT says:

          Let me guess–everyone you disagree with is a paid shill.

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            A man who has too much free time is a paid shill. Mouthing off at anyone who disagrees is what this bunch of contradictory rat bags do in their “idle time.”

        • Eleanore Whitaker says:

          Men like you use any excuse in the book to keep woman walking 10 steps behind you. You hate Hillary. Women know why. She represents all that you Big Bossy, Overbearing Males hate in any woman: Brains. If all you have is a bunch of Twerpie Generation big mouths like Gowdy, Cotton, Issa, Inhofe, Cruz, Jindal and Walker, I’d suggest you put together redoux of the McCarthy style attack dog witch hunts. That way, you’ll make fools of yourselves more than you already have.

          • Otto Greif says:

            Hillary hates all the women her husband had affairs with or raped, she oversaw the intimidation and smear campaigns of them. She wasn’t that smart even before she got brain damage from a stroke .

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            Yes…that’s true…Gingrich’s first wife hated the second and the second now hates the third…The guy couldn’t keep it in his pants if God told him to.

            Hillary is smarter than you will ever be. She has never had a stroke. Stop reading BS from right wing media. As Secy of State, she is THE Most traveled in US history.

            As for her marriage, that really isn’t your business is it? And why are you so jealous of her husband? Wifie doesn’t like you to play around behind he back? And you hate any man who gets found out and his wife let’s him get away with it?

            You guys are a real joke.

          • Otto Greif says:

            She oversaw the intimidation and smear campaigns against women Bill had sex with, why are you defending that?

          • kalpal says:

            Who defended it? Why are you attacking instead of responding? Oh, you have no defense so you are forced to make scurrilous attacks.

          • kalpal says:

            Oh my, you must be one of HRC’s closest buddies to know what she thinks and feels, right? Or are you just another twit who blows smoke out of his fundament and says read the smoke signals.

        • 788eddie says:

          Gene Lyons gets paid for writing commentary, same as Charles Krauthammer, or Robert Samuelson (if you are well-read, you know that they tend to supply right-wing commentary). Please don’t try to suggest that the only reason he is getting paid is that he has written an article that you seem to disagree with.

    • kalpal says:

      Look at the RW media BS talkers and tell us all about shill.

  12. SophieCT says:

    If it were not for Mitt
    Romney’s foolish and humiliating eagerness to exploit Benghazi for 2012 and his colossal loss, we would not even be discussing this today.

  13. Theodora30 says:

    Here is what I don’t get. Surely genuinely classified information is not sent through the State Department regular email. I have read that “secure channels” are used and clearly that does not qualify given how many times it has been hacked.
    If the media is truly concerned about national security why aren’t they demanding that Colin Powell’s emails are looked into. He says he destroyed them but the State Department should have copies of all those he sent to people working there, right? And who decided it was OK to erase them all? How is that OK given that these were work products that should be preserved as part of the public record – especially given he was Sec. State during an unnecessary, disastrous war.

    • Eleanore Whitaker says:

      Even better? Let’s see ALL of the emails between Cheney and Halliburton, prior to that no bid contract to supply the military in Iraq. Don’t wonder why Halliburton moved it’s headquarters out of the US the minute that Horizon Deep Water oil rig spilled millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf that will take generations to clean up on our tax dollars.

  14. joeham1 says:

    Wow, I’ve read most of the comments. It’s amazing how unanimous it is that this is some kind of right wing conspiracy. Forget that she erased most of the emails. Forget that the FBI IS now involved. You could even forget she has been hiding from interviews for months. Don’t even consider there was a subpoena by Congress for the emails. If we demonize the right, it makes Hillary innocent of everything. When I saw the press conference and saw that she was obviously lying I really thought her sheep would realize it. She says she did nothing wrong and her sheep agree. Our country is in huge trouble because the national memo and other publications refuse to have honest conversations. They have convinced most of the people that view this site that all right wingers are evil and the criminals like Hillary are saints. Now I will wait for some of the wackos to call me names. I’m apologize for being a free thinker. Let the slander by the weak minded begin.

    • Buford2k11 says:

      sorry Joe, but your concern is duly noted, and there are crazy winger sites who would approve of your free thinking…thanks, from the weak minded….

    • guest444555 says:

      You are a typical delusional brain dead right wing wacko.

      The consequences for Clinton, in the midst of a Presidential run, are
      far more likely to be political than legal. Criminal violations for
      mishandling classified information all have intent requirements; in
      other words, in order to be guilty of a crime, there must be evidence
      that Clinton knew that the information was classified and intentionally
      disclosed it to an unauthorized person. There is no evidence she did
      anything like that. This is not now a criminal matter, and there is no
      realistic possibility it will turn into one. (Clinton’s critics have
      noted that General David Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in
      connection with the disclosure of classified information to his
      biographer. But Petraeus acknowledged both that he knew the information
      was classified and that his biographer was not cleared to receive it.
      Because Clinton has said that she did not believe the information was
      classified, and because she turned it over only to cleared State
      Department employees, the comparison is inapt.)-Jeffrey Toobin

      • joeham1 says:

        Well genius, I didn’t compare it to the Petraeus case. Also, good use of words on the brain dead bla bla crap. As you know but certainly can’t admit this email Scandel started well before the presidential race started. Finally, I hope you realize that when she read her emails she knew the second she read them weather or not they were confidential or secret. Unlike you and the rest of her minions I will wait for the results of the investigation to pass judgement. My problem with her stems from Bengazi. Anyone who is not guilty, faces the accusations immediately. As far as Bengazi and this email scandal she has hid from both. So, go ahead and act like a 9 year old and call me more names. Whatever you do, don’t be objective that would piss off you friends.

        • Eleanore Whitaker says:

          Awwww….look folks….Little Joey’s McMommy forgot to change his Pampers…Let me guess…his hero is his Uncle Mutton Chops? No..wait…his hero is probably Charles Manson…who also viewed the world from only his own mental illness.

          • joeham1 says:

            OH MY, a man hater. What happened in your life to make you hate so much? I hope you get help for your problems. Next time try staying on topic.

          • kalpal says:

            What happened in old RW men’s lives that they hate women so much and insist on controlling their bodies and refusing to pay them a living wage?

        • 788eddie says:

          Some emails are classified only after the fact, and if only if new events warrant it, and only after review by a group of officials. Hillary may not have known about the possible future classification of many of her emails, or that government regulations regarding the review of emails would be changing after she left office.

          • joeham1 says:

            I get what your saying. However, There is no getting over the fact that after being supoenad she deleted thousands of emails. Then she wouldn’t answer any questions about it. When she did the other day, anyone could see she wasn’t being truthful about it. I’m not a fan of politicians. Between bush and Obama our country is in horrible shape. The right will only blame Obama and the left will only blame Bush. They both suck. No question about that. Nothing changes unless fair minded people admit that Obama and Bush are and were disasters for this country. Between the 2 of them the national debt is up 12 trillion dollars in 14 years. The Bush war in Iraq was a huge mistake and Obama’s foreign policy had made the world a much more dangerous place. Instead of having a honest conversation the parties have created a minion situation. The left and right wing news organizations have created the climate. Hillary and Trump would both be a disaster as president.

          • 788eddie says:

            I couldn’t disagree with you more regarding Bush Vs. Obama. I remember what condition our country was in when President Obama took office; stock market down to just under 6,000, losing over 700,000 jobs a month, people getting dropped from their health insurers, health insurers denying needed coverage, Detroit on the verge of bankruptcy, and a vow of no help from congressional Republicans (and I’m a registered Republican).

            Under President Obama we are now experiencing the longest consecutive number of months of positive job growth in our nation’s history (65 and counting), the stock market is over 16,000, people cannot be denied health insurance coverage, or be dropped by their insurers, and I can begin to feel proud of American-made Street iron again.

            Please don’t get me wrong, Joeham, I’m not saying President George W. Bush was a bad person; just not as good a president as President Obama (but we need the firmer historical perspective of time to be able to say for sure).

            As for the current crop of Democrat and Republican candidates, I’m still listening, reading and watching. We’ve got to decide which of them will help our country vis-a-vis other countries, and whose policies will be better for the decimated middle class of our country. I count myself well-off financially, but from what I’ve seen, there are a lot of our fellow citizens who used to be doing better.

          • joeham1 says:

            The Bush 2nd term was a disaster. Obama’s is just as bad and could be worse. I thought having Black president would make race relations much better. Instead its much worse. The undesputable 3 main reasons this president has been a disaster is: 1) the Iran deal which makes the iaea wait 24 days or more to inspect. That won’t work. THE WHOLE WORLD KNOWS WITH OUT A DOUBT THEY WILL CHEAT. The alternative is not war, that’s a ridiculous statement. 2) raising the debt to 18 trillion. There is no excuse. ( It.will be 20+ when his 8 years are up. That will probably end up being the nail in our economy’s coffin. 3) he has replaced compromise with my way or the highway. Clinton and Gingrich proved our government can work when there is compromise.

          • kalpal says:

            How can having a black president improve or ameliorate the rampant racism in the USA? Don’t you recall that the GOP clearly and unambiguously stated that nothing Obama proposed would be allowed to pass? That was not political opposition that was rabid racism.

          • kalpal says:

            Anyone could see she was not being truthful? Why does your rabid misogyny stand for some sort of reality? The RW is scared shitless that HRC would be as successful as her husband. That is why they hate her and are so intent on destroying her before the next election. Lets not quibble. If she were as evil as the inherently evil RW says she is, they would recruit her to join their ranks rather than struggle against her.

          • joeham1 says:

            I think everyone should be scared if she becomes president. I never said she was evil. She will continue to have people like you think that everyone on the right is evil. If she keeps you believing that

          • kalpal says:

            I concluded that the RW was evil during Reagan’s first term. It was obvious then and it is even more obvious now. I had my first intimation that the GOP stunk when Nixon/Agnew were not sent to prison but Reagan provided the incontrovertible proof.

          • joeham1 says:

            Really? When Reagan took office unemployment was 10%. Interest rates were at 12% to but a house, and inflation was through the roof. During his presidency 23 million jobs were created. If you think that’s evil then the problem is you. Let me tell you one thing and I hope you can understand. The left will tell you all day that the right is evil hoping you believe. The right will tell the die hard republicans how stupid the left is. As long as they can keep us hating then they can fleece the country. You should listen and learn a lot more then you have

          • kalpal says:

            So the work that Volker did, appointed by Carter, needs to be credited to Reagan? I have no clue why you find Reagan admirable. he betrayed his own union members. He screwed over California and then screwed over the entire nation by mentally not being present and allowing his staff to commit lots of crimes.

          • joeham1 says:

            You do know that when Carter left office unemployment was over 10%. Inflation was double digits and home interest rates were up to 13%. The military was a disaster When Reagan took office he ordered the attack of Iran to get the hostages. 2 hours before the attack began Iran released the hostages. Answer this question. Is the new Iran deal a good deal, regardless of the fact that we can’t investigate any of their sites for 24 days? Do you believe the only alternative to the deal is war as Obama has said? If your answer is yes please don’t respond anymore. Talking to someone’s minion is a waste of time

          • kalpal says:

            IO do know that Carter was not personally responsible and that he did appoint Paul Volcker who made the necessary corrections to the US economy most of which went to benefit Saint Ronnie and his insane worshippers.
            Since the IAEA is present at all times in Iran the lie about 24 days surely comes out of a RW website.
            Can you get rid of radioactivity in 24 days?

          • joeham1 says:

            So, it wasn’t Carter’s fault but it’s ok because Volcker fixed it for Reagan. That is the most uninformed statement I ever heard. You didn’t know Hillary wiped her server, and it’s ok that the iaea had to wait 24 days to inspect because they are always there. Oh and I forgot that all republicans are evil too. Let’s end this. Your way to dumb to talk to.

          • kalpal says:

            Either you have problems with reading comprehension or you are a blithering idiot. Take your choice.

          • kalpal says:

            Tell me the side I am missing. Is it the evil RW or is it the lying RW? Can it be the GOP’s multiple investigations of HRC that failed to come up with anything? Look at who you support and ask yourself when was the last time any truth passed their lips? Most of all ask yourself when was the last time a RW government ever did anything for the majority that could be considered benevolent? Not hurting the majority worse does not count as benevolent.

          • joeham1 says:

            Wow. They have you completely drinking the koolaid. The left and right have screwed this country up. You should read about thing before you say things that make no sense. The only 2 good presidents that made any difference areally Reagan and Clinton. Between them they created more then 40 million jobs. Every other president has been terrible. The left has you in their pocket. It’s not the job of either party to be benevolent. Their job is to provide opportunity and security. Do you think that the left has been benevolent to the inner city minorities? They are keeping them uneducated to get their votes! Both parties are keeping the border open to let new voters in. Your hate for the right has kept you blind to reality.

          • kalpal says:

            Reagan was a demented fool and liar. Clinton did some good which is why the “vast right wing conspiracy” fought so hard to discredit him.
            I got my first intimation that the RW was evil when both Nixon and Agnew avoided lengthy prison sentences. The Reagan administration was full of felons including Reagan and GHW Bush. Reagan could not be prosecuted because his brain was long gone and he was famous for sleeping through meetings. Bush pardoned everyone who could have testified against him and put him away.

        • Brat Wingz says:

          Joe …. Hillary was cleared of any wrong doing in Benghazi, too.

          • joeham1 says:

            She was not cleared of any wrong doing. After the British and red cross left, she left the ambassador unprotected. That’s wrong doing! Spin it anyway you want. The incompetence of leaving him with out protection was wrong. The 4 live lost may not matter to most, but it didn’t have to happen!

          • kalpal says:

            Why is it that several GOP led committee hearings failed to find her culpable? Can it be that the GOP congressmen are simply grossly incompetent?

          • joeham1 says:

            You are brain washed. She erased the emails after they sent her a subpoena. Doesn’t that tell you anything? I don’t like either party but my god don’t be so naive, to think this is just about hurting her chances to become president. She erased the evidence that may or may not have shown her guilt. I get that you don’t want to think bad of her. I’m ok with that. I realize that the national memo has demonized the right for years and you have bought into that. But use your head.

          • kalpal says:

            You know that she erased e-mails because you read it in some RW rag? All of the e-mails were turned over to the state department. Had anything been erased they would have detected it. You are making up stuff because you hate her. Are you being paid to hate her?

          • joeham1 says:

            God, I hope your kidding. She admitted she erased them! In fact she admitted it several times. I’m sure you can find it on u tube. You don’t you know that? Omg. I hate her? What a are 6? I don’t hate her. I’ve never even met her!

          • kalpal says:

            As I pointed out earlier, everyone erases e-mails at some point. There was a complete record of all her e-mails held by her attorney which was turned over to the state department. You cleave unto BS and determine that you know something which in fact is ephemeral and inconsequential yet you deem to of great significance. Go on and be America’s wise man and knower of all deep dark secrets which are nothing of value.

          • joeham1 says:

            You do know the difference between scrubbing your server and erasing emails don’t you? Her lawyer doesn’t have a copy of the scrubbed emails. You know that don’t you? Do you even know that the FBI is investigating her for this? You do know she scrubbed the server after she got the subpoena right? Stay in the dark. That’s where she wants you. The sheep for the right and the sheep for the left like you are the reason these criminals get elected. I’m not America’s wise man whatever the hell you mean by that. Both parties are filled with thugs and criminals. The only candidates that may be any good are Ben Carson or O’Malley. I hope you will get more information and learn before you post. Read about scrubbing a server and how different that is from erasing. Good luck

          • kalpal says:

            The first time I worked with a computer was 1972. Were even alive then? I also took classes at university during the rest of the 1970s. I have owned more than 20 computers by now. I imagine that I know something about them. I also imagine that any competent tech can quickly determine if a computer HD has been scrubbed. Keep on believing in your religion of the all knowing ignoramus.

          • joeham1 says:

            Hey genius a tech doesn’t have to determine if she scrubbed it, she admitted she did. Have you been hit in the head? We went over this, you can watch her admit it on u tube. I’m not religious why do you keep saying stupid things?

          • kalpal says:

            She said that she erased personal e-mails. You insist she admitted to committing a felony. I find your faith in your silliness to be less than endearing.

          • joeham1 says:

            Ok, let’s go slow for you. I never said she committed a felony. You said she didn’t erase her emails. Then when you saw the u tube of her admitting it, you came back and said everyone erases emails. I totally realize now that your slow but please try and keep up. Educate yourself before you blindly follow and protect a political party. Now please go away. It’s tiring reading your miss information.

          • kalpal says:

            Never saw any YouTube videos on this topic. I consider your accusation of her to be a non sequitur and ignored it since it lacked substance. Stop operating on belief and get an education. A bit of critical thinking will go a long way to demonstrating that faith and belief are only based in faith and belief.

          • kalpal says:

            Once more I ask you to provide proof for your baseless assertions. Surely you can point to an investigation that examined the servers or the flash drive and showed that something was erased. If you are religious say so but don’t confuse your faith with facts.

          • joeham1 says:

            Look on u tube- “Hillary admitting she erased her emails” it’s there. Again, there is no Santa Claus.

          • kalpal says:

            Have you ever erased any of your emails? I have erased most of mine. I guess we are both criminals and will be spending the next 20 years in adjoining cells. You are to be kind a dunce, plain and simple.

          • joeham1 says:

            Omg, you really are dumb

          • kalpal says:

            Most assuredly you are correct. The first time it was pointed out to me was in the military during Vietnam. I was told that I was so smart that I was stupid. That was nearly 5 decades ago. That same inanity has been repeated many times but never by anyone with a functioning brain.

          • joeham1 says:

            Whoever said it was spot on. Your like a parrot, you repeat anything that your puppet master tells you

          • kalpal says:

            My puppet master will punch you in the nose if he ever becomes more than a figment of your diseased imagination.

          • joeham1 says:

            You type words but don’t say any thing worth reading. Not one thing you’ve said is correct. But instead of actually researching your dribble you double down and type more nonsense. Hillary has minions like you that will believe anything she says. I how your head wound heals

          • kalpal says:

            You operate on faith. I do not. That is the difference between us. That difference will remain till you get an education.

          • joeham1 says:

            Or it could be that she destroyed her emails and didn’t give up any info? Once the FBI is done with their investigation then we will all know the truth. But don’t fool yourself, it’s not that they failed to find her culpable, it’s that the answers are in the emails that she had wiped from her server. You can be a partisan hack or you can be genuinely concerned American and want the truth. Remember one thing. You don’t erase your emails if you have nothing to hide. My only problem is that no one was held accountable for the deaths of 4 people. Someone should have been fired!

          • kalpal says:

            To be a genuinely concerned American you must begin with an assumption that HRC is guilty of something. What it is, is of no concern just be certain that is incontrovertibly guilty and that after all the investigations failing to find anything, it is important to keep digging because you as a “genuinely concerned American” know for a fact that there is skullduggery afoot which must be unearthed.
            You are beneath pathetic.

          • joeham1 says:

            4 people are dead. First ambassador killed since the 70’s. She lied to the families of the slain and told them it was a video and then she told her daughter the night of the attack it was an AL Quada. It’s pathetic that her sheep wouldn’t want to know why she lied and why she wiped her server. Why no one was held accountable. Why they didn’t provide security. Only an idiot and a sheep would say the investigations failed to find anything. She wiped her server after her emails were subpoenaed. If you weren’t retarded you would want to know why! This isn’t a left or right issue. This is a government official hiding something. as long as minions like you allow the questions to go unanswered and blame the people asking the questions then things like this will happen again. I’m not sure if someone as weak minded as you can put yourself in the place of one the family members of the 4 dead. But if you could you would want to know why it really happened. You would want to know what they are hiding. You’ve been fooled into believing it’s just a witch hunt against poor Hillary. If it was the FBI wouldn’t be involved.

          • kalpal says:

            Seems that Hillary was most surely omniscient during her tenure as Secretary of State at least as far as your hind sighted assessment is concerned.

            You are beneath pathetic.

            BTW can you provide a short list of politicians who have never lied to the public? People like GW Bush and Dick Cheney maybe?

            Have you considered offering your massive analytic skills to the US government so that you can become this nation’s savior?

          • joeham1 says:

            Your that big of a hack that you can merely pass this off as just another politician not telling the truth?? You want to deflect this to Bush and Chaney? Really? I don’t have massive analytic skills. Facts don’t lie! All i want is answers. Weather it’s the GOP or a Democrat I want them to be held accountable. You obviously don’t care because your a hack and the people who died weren’t related to you. That’s pathetic! As long as hillary has sheep like you she can get away with anything! Let’s be truthful. Bush and now Obama are the 2 worst presidents in my life time. The 2 best were Cinton and Reagan and Kenedy.

          • kalpal says:

            Which facts are we talking about? The ones you abstract from your bigotry or reality?
            BTW Reagan stunk to high heaven but then he was mentally deficient by the time he was elected. His people understood from the Nixon/Agnew administration that being felons did not mean being penalized.

          • kalpal says:

            The witch hunt is very real. Not the slightest doubt about it. It happened because the GOP is afraid of her being the Democratic candidate when they have no credible candidate of their own.
            So far as I recall her server’s data was saved and was kept by her attorney. You pay far too much attention to RW lies. That seems typical since the RW adores lies.

          • joeham1 says:

            Omg your like a 9 nine year old. Straight down the party line! Total minion! Study moron

          • kalpal says:

            Glad that your massive intellect allows you to recognize a man in his 7th decade who has taught gifted children and at university as a 9 year old. Maybe I will enter my second childhood as soon as you start your first.
            You do love those RW lies, don’t you?

          • joeham1 says:

            Have you been a hack for 7 decades? There isn’t a chance someone with your lack of intelligence can teach anyone. Nice try. I’m not a republican, both parties are ruining this country. Both parties have their sheep like you.

          • kalpal says:

            You are in the RW which means that you are willfully ignorant. You have nothing of value to add to any discussion other than a repetition of RW lies.

          • joeham1 says:

            I have no party affiliation like you nut bag. Both parties suck. Your a left wing crazy. All your words prove it. You don’t believe in justice or truth, you only believe what your told by your party. The funny part is you peddle crap like you teach gifted children! Not a chance! Lol

          • kalpal says:

            I am with the Green Party. You are with the RWNJ party.

          • Joan says:

            No American ambassador is left “without protection”. To equate an ambassador with The Red Cross is ludicrous. It was the ambassador himself who made the decision to travel on that day. It was his choice that left him for the night outside of the embassy and with a small contingent of Marine’s as his guard. It was his choice that brought him to the consulate which was really a CIA base of operations. To suggest that those of us who do not think that Hillary did anything wrong in Benghazi do not care about the lives lost is also ludicrous. I care so much that I volunteered to serve in the US Army. What did you do since you care so very, very much?.

            Why is it that the most ill informed find it necessary to display their ignorance over and over and over again. .

          • joeham1 says:

            Joan, I don’t know why you ill informed display your ignorance over and over. I was in the Navy on the USA Tarawa for 3 years. The British and Red Cross left benghazi before the attack. Any complete idiot knows we should have provided security for him. Instead you blame him!!!!! We know there were hundreds of requests for security from the ambassador and they were all denied. I know you want hillary to have no responsibility for his death, but the fact is she was the secretary of state. It was her responsibility to make sure he was safe! The sad truth is, if it was Bush or a Republican you would want him arrested and so would i.

          • Joan says:

            I am so glad that you have decided that the ill informed shoe fits you. I personally found that it pinched. Enjoy!

          • joeham1 says:

            If you could read, then you would have read that: I said “I don’t know why you ill informed display your ignorance over and over” . I guess I shouldn’t expect you to stay on topic, but when the red Cross and the British left and when hundreds of requests came in to her state department for security you would think they might help on that. Of course if your a complete partisan like you then blaming the dead is how you choose to lie to yourself. Be a thinker not a party hack!

        • kalpal says:

          Are you so demented as to imagine that you are objective? Bah Humbug!

    • Eleanore Whitaker says:

      Did you also forget that Bush in January 2001 had a major shredding party with government documents, many of which were absolutely classifed that linked Daddy to IranContraGate? If memory serves, nearly 1 million documents were shredded. But do let’s go after Hillary Clinton because she’s a very very big threat to the male GOP egos.

      Here are some facts some dunderheaded males in this country better face:

      “Like other Secretaries of State who served before her, Hillary used a personal email address, and the rules of the State Department permitted it.

      She’s already acknowledged that, in hindsight, it would have been better just to use separate work and personal email accounts. No one disputes that.

      The State Department’s request: Last year, as part of a review of its records, the State Department asked the last four former Secretaries of State to provide any work-related emails they had. Hillary was the only former Secretary of State to provide any materials — more than 30,000 emails. In fact, she handed over too many — the Department said it will be returning over 1,200 messages to her because, in their and the National Archives’ judgment, these messages were completely personal in nature. (Tell me again how getting their syrupy mitts on her personal emails was not their real agenda.)

      Hillary didn’t send any classified materials over email: Hillary only used her personal account for unclassified email. No information in her emails was marked classified at the time she sent or received them. She viewed classified materials in hard copy in her office or via other secure means while traveling, not on email.

      Sometimes government agencies disagree about what should be classified, so it isn’t surprising that another agency might want to conduct its own review, even though the State Department has repeatedly confirmed that Hillary’s emails contained no classified information at the time she sent or received them.

      There is absolutely no criminal inquiry into Hillary’s email or email server. Any and all reports to that effect have been widely debunked. Hillary directed her team to provide her email server and a thumb drive in order to cooperate with the review process and to ensure these materials were stored in a safe and secure manner.

      The Benghazi committee was formed to focus on learning lessons from Benghazi to help prevent future tragedies at our embassies and consulates around the globe. Instead, the committee, led by Republican Representative Trey Gowdy, is spending nearly $6 million in taxpayer money to conduct a partisan witch-hunt designed to do political damage to Hillary in the run-up to the election.

      It’s worth noting: Many of the Republican candidates for president have done the same things for which they’re now criticizing Hillary. As governor, Jeb Bush owned his own private server and his staff decided which emails he turned over as work-related from his private account. Bobby Jindal went a step further, using private email to communicate with his immediate staff but refusing to release his work-related emails. Scott Walker and Rick Perry had email issues themselves.

      If you boys have nothing better to do with our tax dollars than wastefully spending it on witchhunts, don’t wonder why the GOP party is the most hated in the US by a majority of Americans.

      • joeham1 says:

        First of all cut the gender crap. This isn’t a male, female thing. If on fact Bush did what you say then hopefully there is a criminal investigation. You version of the Hillary email and bengazi issue sounds like just what Hillary wants you to believe. In fact sounds like you were there. If Hillary was innocent she wouldn’t of destroyed the emails. If you watched the last press conference you could see by her reaction to some of the questions she wasn’t telling the truth. The real sad part about this is even if you found out she was guilty of everything you and most of the minions on this site would still want her for president. The fact is that a lot of people like you have created her. She knows that all she has to say is that this is a right wing conspiracy and you will blame the right and back her. Is no longer who’s best for the job, so

        • Eleanore Whitaker says:

          First of all, let me be the first to congratulate you on your Joe Soprano Mr. Macho BS. Gee..how about a little more of your Macho Man drama? After all, I do understand how a guy like you would want an Oscar for that Oscar award winning performance of Tony Soprano.

          My version isn’t MY version jerkbird…It’s the version the US State Department put out there.

          You were so obviously born without the balls to act like a person…and instead only know how to play Mr. King of the Universe.

          The sad part is you can’t see what your posts make YOU YOU YOU look like.

          Can you say, “Congratulations, Madame President?” Practice that one over and over…you’ll need it.

          With the 21 Tony Soprano bulls of the GOP all cannibalizing each other…all you’ll end up with is chop meat.

          • joeham1 says:

            Eleanore, get help. This has nothing to do with men and women. You sound very petty. Good luck

        • 788eddie says:

          Hey Joe, I destroy personal emails every day, and I’m not guilty of anything other than destroying personal emails. If we didn’t prosecute former President George W. Bush, then same goes for candidate Hillary R. Clinton. What’s fair is fair.

        • Ndysay says:

          Actually I delete 99 percent of the emails I receive. Maybe she did to for the same reason.

        • rome44 says:

          That’s only because the media keeps asking the same question over and over to the point of ad-nauseam.
          What would you do if you were in her shoes everytime you hold a rally you can’t discuss anything because reporters keep asking the same thing at what point do you get frustrated and tired of answering the same question ? She doesn’t have to tell us it’s a right wing conspiracy it’s obvious to me they are the ones who set these wheels in motion by announcing investigation after investigation, placing these allegations out in public.
          We know for a fact most people can be influenced by snippets of information and republicans know this and are good at using it, they know we Americans have the attention span of a gnat.

          • joeham1 says:

            If she came clean and gave up the information they requested it would already be over. When she erased the emails it hurt her. When spent months hiding from the questions, it made her look guilty. There is no denying that. It may be convenient to blame the right, but she has not acted like someone who is innocent. She has blamed ALL her Scandels on the right wing. It’s the same thing as me or you being blamed for a major crime. If I didn’t do it, I’m fully cooperating and not lawyering up. For you or anyone else to automatically blame the right is exactly what she wants.

    • rome44 says:

      I’m a free thinker myself, but I’ve arrived to a very different opinion. None of us know what’s in that server. As bystanders without access to the server and most are not competent to even know what we’d be looking at, we are influenced by the media and again it depends what media. In todays political climate even the media is polarized, so what is one to do, who to believe.
      She says she erased personal e-mails why should we not believe her ? You do know she holds a law degree and is conscious of the consequences of lying or playing games with her career. Viewing from that perspective I don’t believe it’s in her interest to lie or hide.
      My personal reason for vilifying the right wing is because they make it very obvious what their motives are. Months and millions spent by Republicans investigating Benghazi produced nothing, all a waste of my tax dollars and yours ??? I guess if you pay taxes. Now it’s Gowdys turn, just at what point will they give that up. Today they have grabbed on to the server, “ah-ha” they say see we told you so she broke the law. All the while they are smearing her with no proof of anything. Everyday we see the media giving us the results of polls that her trust by the public is eroding, so their propaganda works. They are bankrupt of ideas so they resort to these despicable tactics of attacking without an iota of proof.
      I would hold a whole different perspective on Republicans if all our politicians including democrats were telling us she’s lying. But as you can see it’s only Republicans on the witch hunt.
      I will not call you names but will only ask wait for results before convicting her. As a free thinker verify what you are being fed. Lastly, a free thinker will not allow himself/herself to be persuaded by a political party’s propaganda.

      • joeham1 says:

        I agree with most of what you said. unlike a lot of people hope it’s not true. Both parties are guilty of witch hints. If witch hints give us the truth I’m all for them. If there is ever a question of corruption an independent investigation should be conducted immediately. Now that the FBI IS involved hopefully the truth will come out. You must admit she has not acted like someone with nothing to hide. I keep hearing people say that so and so has their own server and this isn’t new and so on. My issue is she deleted emails after they were supoenad. That’s troubling. We will never know the truth about bengazi. My only issue there is that we knew that the British and the red cross left because it was to dangerous. At that point it was unacceptable for us to have an ambassador there unprotected. None of these issues are a left or right thing. Again I only want us to go back to the days where the governmental ran on compromise. Unfortunately the right is owned by big business and billionaires and the left is owned by the unions and billionares.

        • rome44 says:

          Like I said there is a lot of rumors flying around out there. Being rational with my answer I have to say since I don’t know her personally, I don’t know how she acts, I only see her when she steps in front of a mic. but that tells me nothing.
          No one knows for sure when she deleted or what she deleted. We have her word is there reason for doubting her ? This is exactly what I washing talking about it’s a campaign of smear. I prefer to reserve judgment and give her the benefit of the doubt.
          That embassies are not protected in this region of the world is beyond me as much as we are hated there it makes no sense not to have protection.
          this should have been corrected way before Hillary became Sec. of State, I’m not positive this is true but I heard in a news report the ambassador turned down an offer of protection he made some comment he knew the people there an he felt at ease among them.
          As a life long union man I hate to be mixed in with as someone dictating public policy since our goal is to only maintain fair labor laws for the benefit of the working class people. We are not feeding at the public trough we ask for no monetary handouts.
          Just fair labor laws that’s it.

    • Brat Wingz says:

      Joe …. Anyone can accuse but proving is more difficult. Hillary has been cleared of all GOP made up crimes.

      • joeham1 says:

        So, what Scandels did the GOP make up? Most of the country thinks she’s just another dirty politician. I realize your trying to have faith in her but let’s be real, she’s as dirty as they get. Most of the GOP and Democrats are dirty. There is no Santa.

    • bromeando says:

      You folks should read the law that governs emails. You might be surprised to find out that the policy did not change until 2 years after Hillary left office. Even so she submitted 55 thousand pages of emails to be archived.

      Suck it up witch hunters.

  15. guest444555 says:

    The media loves pushing a false narrative about Hillary. They say nothing about the GOP clown car imploding. Right now, the GOP have an immigrant hating bigot as their front runner. TRUMP and his bigoted and extreme views will drive the whole republican party down in Nov 2016. Count on it.

  16. guest444555 says:

    President Hillary Clinton

    The wing nuts better get used to it. Bigot Trump will be the best thing that happened to the democratic party. Trump is gonna destroy the whole GOP in 2016.

  17. ps0rjl says:

    The Hillary bashing crowd reminds me of the story of the fable of the boy who cried wolf too often. Except for the Clinton haters, most people are tired of every day hearing about a new scandal/criminal scandal concerning the Clintons. But go ahead and bash her. She is still going to be the next President of the United States.

  18. James M. Ray says:

    Who knew Obama’s FBI is Hillary’s “enemy”??

    • Eleanore Whitaker says:

      I don’t know…Tell us “who” knew. The FBI has many employees from leftover administrations. But, do go ahead…tell us.

      Then, please do tell us why this same FBI missed JEB’s Miami thug associations with Pareda and Recarey.

      • James M. Ray says:

        Who knew you were plural?

        And if you want to find out something about the Fibbies, I’d suggest you ask them-not-me. Since you’re plural, one of you should be able to find the time.

        • Eleanore Whitaker says:

          Who knew you are a man with no balls to admit facts? Try again hot shot…that Bull nosed Bully boy pick up truck with the Stars and Bars flying out the window proves only that white trash males like you have nothing in the way of brains, much less recognize honor, decency and integrity. But do keep up your crook act. We all enjoy watching men who act like asshats go down in flames.

          • James M. Ray says:

            I stand by ALL my words. And Deez Nuts, honey. So deal with it.

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            Most blockheads do dipshit. The only way to break into stone is to crack it open with a sledgehammer. Too bad your blockhead BS doesn’t impress anyone but you. As for those nuts, look again….I undertand you’d mistake raisins for nuts with a dipshit mind as thick as cement.

          • James M. Ray says:

            Name calling = FAIL. You’d already lost, though, honey.

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            Get off it…Name calling? You mean like Obummer? Odumbo? And how about all those Mr. Man BS name you guys love to use on Hillary?

            I lost nothing. Only in a blockhead bull mind like yours do you see all women beneath your gender and you as the master of the universe. Dream on teenage king and while you are at it, get off the Viagra addiction.

            You are a loser…all anyone has to do is take a look at your “photo.”

          • James M. Ray says:

            I rest my case.

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            A. You NEVER had a “case.”
            B. You only have baggage crazy men like you carry since birth
            C. You just want the last word and hate it that you can’t force a woman to bow to your bully BS. Now go beat up on your wife like you boozer/womanizer/low life crooks always do.

            Nothing like a jerk who thinks he is King of the Universe…too bad he has no crown.

      • TMZ1928 says:

        Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, Destruction of Evidence, Failure to Maintain Federal Records, Sending and Receiving Classified Material on a Private Server, Failure to Properly Store Classified Material, to name a few. The numerous Federal Records Acts violations carry prison terms, and the violator forfeits office and is disqualified from future public office,

        • Eleanore Whitaker says:

          Yes. and so that means Colin Powell, JEB, JIndal, Walker, Rice, Cheney, Bush ’43 and Rumsfeld are all held under that same 2014 law right?

          What a stupid stupid “ignernt” post …Check the Senate and House voting record on when that law was passed…in 2014…AFTER Hillary was no longer Secretary of State.

          But do keep up trying to get rid of Hillary and watch your GOP boys wish they were dead. Hell hath no fury like a woman blamed for something she knows she didn’t do but several GOP bigs did.

          Hillary didn’t break any laws in existence. And, she is the ONLY one of the last 4 Secretaries of State who turned over 33,000 emails, her private server and the Justice Dept. has already states 3 times she broke no laws.

          But some men in this country will keep up their BS until they are the ones who end up having to divulge ALL of their secret emails on their private servers that were sent on how to take down a Democratic president like Obama.

          Oh what tangled webs some men weave when first they practice to deceive.

        • rome44 says:

          Allegations are not facts nor law, simply making allegations will not do, anyone can make them. If what you allege were in fact violations of law you know very well her enemies would have brought charges against her at lightening speed. Months of hearings by Izza produced nothing. Now Gowdy has picked up the mantle hoping he can uncover something. Frankly, I’m very disappointed in them. They ask the American people for their votes with the promise to fix Washington. Americans vote for them and are now the majority in both houses and what are they doing for the American people why they are busy attacking women’s rights, healthcare, cutting programs that help children/poor, beating up on the voiceless immigrants.
          Republicans can’t win the white house so they resort to despicable tactics to destroy her, believing they will automatically waltz into the presidency. Little do they understand they have nothing to offer they are bankrupt in ideas.
          They only know one thing and one thing alone which is unadulterated power that is what drives them, they don’t care about the welfare of our people it’s all me, me, me.

    • Bren Frowick says:

      The FBI is NOT Hilary’s enemy. Why would you suggest it is? Oh, right, because you are trying desperately to perpetuate the myth that it is investigating her. It is not. And has repeatedly, publicly, stated as much.

  19. TMZ1928 says:

    Trump: The White House 2017-2025

    Hillary: The Big House 2017-2037

  20. Democrats need to tell Republicans to stop “Swift Boating”
    Hillary. This is the same “Swift Boating” tactic that Repubs used against John
    Kerry even though the man who Kerry returned for and saved his life attested to
    this fact.

    • ChuSez says:

      The difference is that this time the attacks are coming from the left wing of the Democratic Party and they are true.
      Clinton is a willing tool of the Wall Street Bankers, always has been, always will be. Follow the money.

  21. ChuSez says:

    “New Poll Shows 60% of Americans Think Hillary Clinton is Untrustworthy and Dishonest”
    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/11/new-poll-shows-60-of-americans-think-hillary-clinton-is-untrustworthy-and-dishonest.html

    Keep whistling past the graveyard, Clinton fans.

  22. ChuSez says:

    Here’s all you need to know about about Clinton:

    Top Contributors

    Hillary Clinton, career

    Citigroup Inc $824,402

    Goldman Sachs $760,740

    DLA Piper $700,530

    JPMorgan Chase & Co $696,456

    Morgan Stanley $636,564

    https://www.opensecrets.org/po

    That’s just political contributions, not including paid speeches.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.