fbpx

Type to search

They Were Never Close To Indicting Hillary — 20 Years Ago Or Yesterday

Campaign 2016 Elections Featured Post Memo Pad Politics Top News

They Were Never Close To Indicting Hillary — 20 Years Ago Or Yesterday

Share
treason

Return with us now to those thrilling days of yesteryear: specifically to September 1992, when Attorney General William Barr, top-ranking FBI officials, and — believe it or not — a Treasury Department functionary who actually sold “Presidential Bitch” T-shirts with Hillary Clinton’s likeness from her government office, pressured the U.S. Attorney in Little Rock to open an investigation of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Whitewater investment.

The Arkansas prosecutor was Charles “Chuck” Banks, a Republican appointed by President Reagan, and recently nominated to a Federal judgeship by President George H.W. Bush.  It was definitely in Banks’s interest to see Bush re-elected.

The problem was that Banks knew all about Madison Guaranty S&L and its screwball proprietor Jim McDougal. His office had unsuccessfully prosecuted the Clintons’ Whitewater partner for bank fraud. He knew perfectly well that McDougal had deceived them about their investment, just as he’d fooled everybody in a frantic fiscal juggling act trying to save his doomed thrift.

Banks and local FBI agents were unimpressed with the “Presidential Bitch” woman’s analysis. She showed shaky grasp of banking law, and obvious bias — listing virtually every prominent Democrat in Arkansas as a suspect. When FBI headquarters in Washington ordered its Little Rock office to proceed on L. Jean Lewis’s criminal referral, Banks decided he had to act.

He wrote a stinging letter to his superiors in the DOJ refusing to be a party to a trumped-up probe clearly intended to affect the presidential election. “Even media questions about such an investigation,” he wrote, “all too often publicly purport to ‘legitimize what can’t be proven.’”

Keep that phrase in mind.

Banks also promised to refer reporters to the Attorney General. And that was the end of the Bush administration’s “Hail Mary” attempt to win the 1992 election with a fake scandal. Also the end of Chuck Banks’ political career.

The prevailing themes of the Clinton Legends, however, were set: imaginary corruption, and a “Presidential Bitch.” Eight years and $70 million later, Kenneth Starr’s Whitewater prosecutors folded their cards, proving the Little Rock prosecutor had been right all along.

Shamefully, several of Starr’s assistants recently showed up in the Washington Post reminiscing about how they almost indicted Hillary Clinton. Except that they never did, and for the same reason FBI director James Comey wouldn’t dare take his largely adverbial case (“extremely,” “carelessly,” etc.) into a courtroom against her.

Because when the accused can afford competent defense counsel, a bogus case endangers the prosecutor more than the defendant. Indict the former Secretary of State and lose? Goodbye career.

If the Post had a sense of humor, they’d have illustrated the article with a photo of “Judge Starr,” as he liked to be called, dressed in his cheerleader costume leading Baylor University’s felonious football team onto the field.

But back to Comey’s successful grandstand play — successful at protecting Comey’s own career while wounding the Democratic presidential nominee, that is. See, no way could the former Secretary of State be prosecuted for mishandling classified information without convincing evidence that a bad guy got his hands on it. The best Comey could do was to say that “it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”

Clinton herself noted that Comey was simply speculating. “But if you go by the evidence,” she said “there is no evidence that the system was breached or hacked successfully.” (Although the State Department’s was.) Pundits can sneer, but you can’t convict somebody with maybe.

What secrets are we talking about? Slate’s Fred Kaplan explains: “Seven of [Clinton’s] eight email chains dealt with CIA drone strikes, which are classified top secret/special access program—unlike Defense Department drone strikes, which are unclassified. The difference is that CIA drones hit targets in countries, like Pakistan and Yemen, where we are not officially at war; they are part of covert operations… But these operations are covert mainly to provide cover for the Pakistani and Yemeni governments, so they don’t have to admit they’re cooperating with America.”

Top Secret, maybe. But regularly featured in the New York Times. The eighth email chain was about the President of Malawi.

Seriously.

Even Comey’s press conference assertion that Clinton handled emails marked classified failed to survive a congressional hearing. Shown the actual documents, Comey conceded that they weren’t properly marked. Indeed, it was a “reasonable inference” they weren’t classified at all. Both concerned trivial diplomatic issues in Third World countries. Really.

Michael Cohen in the Boston Globe: “Whatever one thinks of Clinton’s actions, Comey’s depiction of Clinton’s actions as ‘extremely careless’ was prejudicial and inappropriate. The only reason for delivering such a lacerating attack on Clinton was to inoculate Comey and the FBI from accusations that he was not recommending charges be filed due to political pressure. But that’s an excuse, not an explanation, and a weak one at that.”

The very definition, indeed, of legitimizing “what can’t be proven.”

Tags:
Gene Lyons

Gene Lyons is a political columnist and author. Lyons writes a column for the Arkansas Times that is nationally syndicated by United Media. He was previously a general editor at Newsweek as wells an associate editor at Texas Monthly where he won a National Magazine Award in 1980. He contributes to Salon.com and has written for such magazines as Harper's, The New York Times Magazine, The New York Review of Books, Entertainment Weekly, Washington Monthly, The Nation, Esquire, and Slate. A graduate of Rutgers University with a Ph.D. in English from the University of Virginia, Lyons taught at the Universities of Massachusetts, Arkansas and Texas before becoming a full-time writer in 1976. A native of New Jersey, Lyons has lived in Arkansas with his wife Diane since 1972. The Lyons live on a cattle farm near Houston, Ark., with a half-dozen dogs, several cats, three horses, and a growing herd of Fleckvieh Simmental cows. Lyons has written several books including The Higher Illiteracy (University of Arkansas, 1988), Widow's Web (Simon & Schuster, 1993), Fools for Scandal (Franklin Square, 1996) as well as The Hunting Of The President: The 10 Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton, which he co-authored with National Memo Editor-in-Chief Joe Conason.

  • 1

98 Comments

  1. Brandi69854426 July 13, 2016

    I currently profit about $6k-$8k /every month for freelancing i do from my home. If you are prepared to complete basic at home jobs for few hrs /a day at your house and make solid income while doing it… This is perfect for you… http://chilp.it/dba5a53

    Reply
  2. FireBaron July 13, 2016

    And, of course, our “friends” on the right side of the aisle now want to have another investigation as to whether Hillary Clinton knowingly lied to the House Committee that was investigating her emails! When will these idiots stop wasting taxpayer money.

    Reply
    1. stcroixcarp July 13, 2016

      Never! They will hold their collective breath, shut down government and die before they will stop persecuting the Clintons!

      Reply
      1. Dominick Vila July 13, 2016

        Especially when we consider the damage that Comey’s report is going to inflict on Hillary. Calling a presidential candidate careless and reckless with classified information, even if the information she handled was not really classified, is more than just a low blow. Republicans know they have a powerful line of attack against Hillary, and they will keep this issue alive until November…and beyond if she is elected.

        Reply
      2. Jmz Nesky August 10, 2016

        All to get back on democrats.. Any Democrat for the real embarrassment of the actual criminal act/resignation of one of their own.. You don’t believe me? Look at their mascot and know they never forget (or forgive) either.

        Reply
    2. Mama Bear July 13, 2016

      As a taxpayer, I want my money back.

      Reply
      1. CharlieAdamsInKY July 14, 2016

        I not only want my money back, I want the traitors involved in these farces out of office and serving time in a Federal pen. Not one of the cushy ones, either.

        Reply
      2. Jane August 8, 2016

        Exactly. Tax revolt! Stop throwing away good money after bad!

        Reply
  3. I am not a big Hillary fan, but this rubbish is nonsense.

    The Clinton’s were more preyed upon than anything else.

    And I, too, am sick of the waste of public moneys squandered on this baboon-ery.

    Reply
    1. TZToronto July 13, 2016

      What do you have against baboons? At least baboons are baboons and don’t know any better when they do things we’d consider “baboonish.” Republicans of the type that willingly waste taxpayers’ money on witch hunts and repeated attempts to repeal health care for millions know exactly what they are doing and why–and they make everyone else pay for their political theater.

      Reply
      1. Charles van Rotterdam July 14, 2016

        Perhaps he meant buffoonery rather than baboon-ery.

        Reply
        1. Jane August 9, 2016

          Either way, he makes a good point.

          Reply
  4. Eleanore Whitaker July 13, 2016

    Actually, the GOP Get Clinton Death Squads know just how close the European governments are to hauling Bush and Cheney before war crimes councils.

    The GOP has mastered the art of delay, deflection and distraction. These are the 3 Ds upon which they predicate their back room agendas.

    So, if they need more money from Dems states for Republican states, they delay legislations that would rightfully put equal funding into Dem states. They deflect all accountability by always keeping the spotlight on any tiny Dem action or word they can turn into major investigations.

    They use distraction to hide what their are really planning, Divide and Conquer. That’s it folks. That’s the Republicans in a nutshell.

    Their biggest obstacle these days is that the more they try to divide the country, the less they conquer. You bet they want a bunch of gun happy nuts to be more armed than cops, the National Guard or the Military.

    You bet they use their Manchurian Candidate style brainwashing on the under educated, inbreds who always seem to be able to buy arsenals of weapons while they collect welfare the rest of us pay for.

    Reply
  5. FT66 July 13, 2016

    I have never seen a guy like James Comey who really knows what he is doing, and never let his job fall into party affiliations. He is the very serious man when it comes on doing the work he was assigned for. If we could had at least 10 individuals working like him, the country would have prospered long, long time ago.

    Reply
    1. Jinmichigan July 13, 2016

      Comey’s comments were filled with partisan innuendo. So much for being unbiased.

      Reply
      1. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

        She lied when she said that her private server was approved by the State Dept. sShe failed to turn over more than 2,000 work related emails. She lied and said she did not have classified info on her server. She lied when she stated none of her emails were marked classified. Those are facts. Where is the innuendo?

        Reply
        1. Jinmichigan July 14, 2016

          You sir have a vivid imagination. Comey never said what you are spewing.

          Reply
        2. CharlieAdamsInKY July 14, 2016

          STFU and troll elsewhere, PAID LIAR.

          Reply
        3. Jmz Nesky August 10, 2016

          Who said she lied? There’s many executives within the federal g’ment and that the actual official failed to appear in order to back her statement is not impossible since the panel can at any given time be selective in who they subpoena.. As far as your allegation that she lied about having classified info on her server.. “Even Comey’s press conference assertion that Clinton handled emails
          marked classified failed to survive a congressional hearing. Shown the actual documents, Comey conceded that they weren’t properly marked. Indeed, it was a ‘reasonable inference’ they weren’t classified at all.”.. Now look at your email spam folder.. Can you really determine whether any of them are important or not without proper indication? Face it, you’re wearing typical right wing blinders and listening to idiots who don’t know any more than you did before they convinced you that they did.

          Reply
  6. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

    So let me get this straight. I spend a huge amount of time and resource to set up my own email system, not just a private email account but a secret private server that I maintain in my home. I leave office and break all kinds rules and do not turn any of those communications to the government. When my secret is uncovered I lie about it and say it was approved, I handled no classified information and only used one device and say this was all out of convenience. I am then forced to turn over the emails but instead turn over only half of them that I select and claim the rest were personal and lie again and say I turned over all the work related emails. I then wipe the server clean thus attempting to destroy the evidence of the emails I did not want the investigators to see. The FBI demands I turn over my server and they find the deleted emails. They determine that more than one hundred emails were classified and several even marked classified. Of the deleted emails more than 2,000 were work related and several were classified. I totally lied ,broke laws and put the nations security at risk. I am admonished but not charged with negligence. If I ever get into this kind of trouble – Can I get the Hillary treatment please?

    Reply
    1. jmprint July 13, 2016

      Yes you are totally lying, there were 3 marked likely classified in a subdued manner, others were marked classified after the fact. Let’s not forget this is just a total witch hunt and a lot of my taxes are spent carelessly, on nothing. Like President Bush said. “…we often judge others by there worst examples, by judging ourselves in the best intentions. You want this women to suffer for a mistake that harmed none, but yet are totally ignoring the fact that Trump will ruin our great country as we know it now. Many other people in the government have done worse, much worse, but this witch hint on Hiliary is and has been going on TOO long. As the guy said “legitimize what can’t be proven.’ And that is why it falls under the title as another WITCH HUNT.

      Reply
      1. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

        I am lying? What am I lying about? She clearly mishandled classified information according to the FBI. Of the emails she turned over 110 contained classified information of which more than half although not marked contained classified information at the time. The only emails that were marked classified were deleted. What a coincidence. When I teach my children I explain to never intentionally break rules. If you are called on it then you do not lie and you cooperate and hope for mercy. She is completely disqualified from being our President. This was not a mistake. She went to great lengths to set up this secret server to hide her communications from everyone. Why would the Obama administration conduct a witch hunt on their preferred successor? This was not a partisaned congressional investigation. Just remember what comes around goes around. Everybody will be judged in the end. She does not deserve my vote.

        Reply
        1. jmprint July 13, 2016

          Why respond if you don’t read. I told you why your were lying, now go back and read. You say she is not worthy of your vote, but yet, your vote is worthy for a thief, a liar, a con man, an adulterer, a rapist and a racist? Looks like your head is screwed on backwards.

          Reply
          1. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

            I am a life long democrat and have never voted for a Republican. I will either not vote at all or write in Bernie Sanders. I am a progressive.

            Reply
          2. Bren Frowick July 13, 2016

            You lied about her supposedly “not turning over” her work-related emails. Back in the real world, she was asked for emails RELATED TO BENGHAZI, and those are the ones she gave. When the farcical clowns pretending to “investigate” demanded more, she GAVE them more. Tens of thousands of them. And would gladly have buried them under even more, if there were more.

            Reply
          3. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

            After learning that none of her emails were on a government server the FBI and State Dept. requested all of her work related emails. She failed to produce over 2,000 of them. Period. End of story. Full stop. If this was you or me, we are in a jail cell right now.

            Reply
          4. Independent1 July 13, 2016

            A FLAT OUT LIE!!! PROVE IT!!!

            Reply
          5. A_Real_Einstein July 14, 2016

            ok

            Here is what Comey actually said, verbatim:

            The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional e-mails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private e-mail domain. Others we found by reviewing the archived government e-mail accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as Secretary Clinton, including high-ranking officials at other agencies, people with whom a Secretary of State might naturally correspond.
            Do you have any more stupid requests? Would you like some more of this butt kicking? You are so pathetic.

            Reply
          6. A. D. Reed July 14, 2016

            And was this in his Tuesday press conference?

            Reply
          7. King of America July 14, 2016

            Again, that is not what the FBI said – “verbatim” or otherwise. Sorry you think that your Fox News falsified talking points justify your support for DONALD FRIGGIN TRUMP, ACTUAL NAZI, but they don’t.

            Reply
          8. Independent1 July 14, 2016

            And being a Republican who was appointed by Bush, virtually everything Comey said was a fabrication of reality that bordered on a blatant lie. Just like with you, I wouldn’t believe a thing Comey said!! It was all conjured up to damage Hillary’s reputation and had virtually nothing to do with what really happened.

            Reply
          9. Independent1 July 14, 2016

            And like I asked you before, WHY ISN’T THE FBI INVESTIGATING ALL THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPOSEDLY SENT CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO A RECIPIENT WHOSE ADDRESS WAS CLEARLY ON A PERSONAL, NON-GOVERNMENT, SERVER????

            WHEN THEY ARE FAR MORE GUILTY THAN HILLARY!! IF ANYONE IS GUILTY OF ANYTHING!!!

            Reply
          10. JPHALL July 21, 2016

            But this is not what he said under oath Thursday. I wonder why the big disparity?

            Reply
          11. Bren Frowick July 14, 2016

            For a “real einstein”, you donlt have a real good comprehension of how either email or the FBI works. You are attempting to make up out of whole tisuue paper an accusation that she was somehow trying to conceal them, and that there is a giant conspiracy involving the Republican director of the Bureau going back decades to protect the Clintons. The FBI clearly has a better handle on the reality than you do, and you would do well to remove the tinfoil hat… Period. End of Story. Full stop.

            Reply
          12. King of America July 14, 2016

            Not actually a crime either!

            Reply
          13. A. D. Reed July 13, 2016

            Nobody believes that. No progressive would choose such a ding-bat moniker for himself; it’s exactly the kind of sneering, snide, self-parodying term the right-wing uses about liberals, and we can all hear your voice sarcastically and sardonically claiming, “Oh, yeah, I’m a progressive, I’m a real einstein.”

            But you don’t fool real liberals. We use our own actual names because we’re proud to be who we are.

            Reply
          14. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

            30% of democrats believe she should have been indicted and an even higher number believe she is not trustworthy. That explains her weakness in the polls. She can’t even beat Trump. How pathetic.

            Reply
          15. A. D. Reed July 14, 2016

            Her weakness in the polls is such that she’s beating Dumkopf nationally and in swing states, even after the week of “battering” by Comey and Chaffetz and co.

            And you didn’t respond to my analysis of your phony moniker and phony self-identification as a progressive or Democrat. Which, by the way, is another tell: you wrote: “I am a life long democrat and have never voted for a Republican.”

            Note which party name you capitalized and which you left lower-case.

            You can’t even disguise yourself well.

            Reply
          16. King of America July 14, 2016

            Weirdly, public opinion isn’t how we decide criminality!

            Reply
          17. CharlieAdamsInKY July 14, 2016

            You are a goddamned TeaPubliKKKlan PAID LIAR, is what you are.

            Reply
        2. jmprint July 13, 2016

          So much for pretending to be a Bernie supporter, looks like I was right, you are a republican dumba$$ troll.

          Reply
        3. A. D. Reed July 13, 2016

          She clearly did NOT mishandle classified information, according to the FBI. The FBI director claimed she was “extremely careless” and claimed in a press conference on Tuesday — not under oath — that there were 110 emails with classified information in them. On Thursday — when he was under oath — he admitted that in fact there were only 3 emails, that they were incorrectly marked, that anyone with knowledge of the classification manual would conclude they did not contain classified information, that the man who claimed to have hacked her account lied, that there was no evidence it had ever been compromised …

          See, Einstein, when a person makes unsubstantiated assertions in a press conference you hear them and take them as gospel. When that same person, two days later, takes an oath to tell the truth and says the exact opposite of what he’d said in the press conference, you hit the mute button. So you give credence to his partisan rants but totally deny his sworn testimony under oath to Congress.

          That’s why you’re a laughingstock on these pages: because we Democrats and progressives believe in facts, and we know that tin-hat-wearing Trumpeters and the rest of the Republican party — like you — long ago stepped away from the “reality-based world,” as Cheney’s aide put it so eloquently.

          Reply
          1. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

            Sorry A.D. we have google and the internet now. We can look stuff up. What is below is called a transcript. This is what Comey actually said, verbatim.
            FBI investigators have also read all of the approximately 30,000 e-mails provided by Secretary Clinton to the State Department in December 2014. Where an e-mail was assessed as possibly containing classified information, the FBI referred the e-mail to any U.S. government agency that was a likely “owner” of information in the e-mail, so that agency could make a determination as to whether the e-mail contained classified information at the time it was sent or received, or whether there was reason to classify the e-mail now, even if its content was not classified at the time it was sent (that is the process sometimes referred to as “up-classifying”).
            From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.
            The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional e-mails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private e-mail domain. Others we found by reviewing the archived government e-mail accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as Secretary Clinton, including high-ranking officials at other agencies, people with whom a Secretary of State might naturally correspond.
            This helped us recover work-related e-mails that were not among the 30,000 produced to State. Still others we recovered from the laborious review of the millions of e-mail fragments dumped into the slack space of the server decommissioned in 2013.
            With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been “up-classified.”

            Your turn. please provide a link or the actual transcript of these so called contradictions. Funny thing is that you cant. You cannot provide transcripts of something that never happened. Your BS has been called. now go away fool.

            Reply
          2. King of America July 14, 2016

            “verbatim” huh.

            Reply
          3. King of America July 14, 2016

            VERBATIM:

            adverb

            1. in exactly the same words; word for word:
            to repeat something verbatim.

            adjective

            2.corresponding word for word to the original source or text:
            a verbatim record of the proceedings.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          4. judithcarteach July 15, 2016

            Could you please, “A-Real-Einstein”, share the source from which you “quoted” above? You know, “what Comey actually said, verbatim” – can you please give the site where you found these words “verbatim”. I would like to read it for myself. Thank you.

            Reply
        4. King of America July 14, 2016

          I love that you spend all this time breathlessly repeating Fox News, yet claim to be a progressive. You’re a one-man case study in cognitive dissonance.

          Reply
    2. Jinmichigan July 13, 2016

      Wow, I see you have quite the imagination. Or you are just a blatant liar. Which is it?

      Reply
      1. Independent1 July 13, 2016

        All if the above. Fake Einstein clearly lives in his own fantasy world and really doesn’t have enough brains to carry on a rational conversation with anyone above the 3rd grade level.

        Reply
        1. Jinmichigan July 14, 2016

          Yes, it does seem like fantasy is the main input to his posts.

          Reply
    3. FluffMuff July 13, 2016

      Get what straight? 1. private email server (ooooo ‘secret’) used by Bill. Hardly a secret. 2. What does break all kinds of rules mean besides your own rhetoric? 3. She never lied about having the server. 4. Having such an email server was NOT against the rules at the time: “There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.” 5. IG Memo On Classified Information In Emails: “None Of The Emails … Had Classification Or Dissemination Markings.” A memo from the ICIG clearly stated that “none of the emails we reviewed had classification or dissemination markings”: THE FBI Never demanded her server. SHE voluntarily turned it over TO the DOJ-SHE HAD ALREADY voluntarily printed copies all of her work emails as required by law (and just as Powell) and long before gave them to the State Dept. Republicans then later demanded the server itself. 6. THERE WERE NO EMAILS MARKED CLASSIFIED AT ALL; I’m sure you have no idea what that means. IF any document IS marked you certainly can’t miss it.http://www.archives.gov/isoo/training/marking-booklet.pdf
      The FBI UPCLASSIFIED the 120 or so mails AFTER THE FACT; which is fine;but there is NO retroactive application. The 3 ? again NO MARKING; there WAS a ((c)) in a trailing email next to a paragraph-a small c meaning Confidential. The document itself had no markings, nor did the portion of the email that went TO her. Yes, she replied to it; make note that these were documents sent ONLY to and fromt the State Department’s own email .DO YOU know or remember the 22 million emails that Rove deleted during the firing of democrat attorneys? 22 million; white house server!!!

      Reply
      1. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

        She lied when she told us she had gotten her secret server approved by the State. Department.

        She lied when she said she had turned over all of her work related emails.

        She lied when she said that none of the emails contained classified information. After being caught in that lie she revised it to say none of the emails were marked classified. We then found 3 pf the deleted emails did have classification markings.

        You could try to make the argument that she did not mean to lie but is just terribly incompetent. Either way she will not get my vote. She has disqualified herself from the high office. I judge people especially candidates for President based on how they respond to adversity. She totally failed.

        Reply
        1. A. D. Reed July 13, 2016

          You do understand that she doesn’t want your vote, don’t you? It’s Mr. Trump who clearly and honestly (for once) asserted that he loves the uneducated. So please… vote Drumpf.

          Oh … and stop lying about Hillary. None of her emails did contain classified information. Even the three that were not properly marked “confidential” were improperly unmarked: the dept. now says those shouldn’t have been considered classified.

          She turned over all work-related emails she knew of, based on her lawyers’ going through them to make that determination. Some had both personal and work-related info on them, and they were subsequently turned over. Not destroyed, not hidden, just overlooked. And none of those had anything classified in them, either.

          Reply
          1. King of America July 14, 2016

            A_Real_Einstein was never a Democrat; like all BoBs, he is either a Green (mystical conspiracy theorist) or Libertarian (racist/misogynist conspiracy theorist). It’s not worth pretending these people have ever had anything to do with being liberal, or that they represent more than a tiny fraction of the actual vote.

            Reply
      2. Independent1 July 13, 2016

        Say there dummkopf, if Hillary is guilty of something, what about the 300 or so even dumber people in our government who would have violated classified information handling protocol just for having sent these emails to her knowing they were going to a non-government server address??? Are you suggesting that everyone be charged for mishandling classified emails?? In reality, the senders are the ones who are more guilty by even having sent Hillary the emails in the first place.

        Reply
      3. Independent1 July 13, 2016

        Ooops!! Sorry!! I clicked on the wrong reply!!

        Reply
    4. Gilbert West July 13, 2016

      Correction… None of them were marked classified! and Comey even said so… He weakly offered that some were confidential… Confidential does not equal classified. If the Republicans were hanging their election hat on that… they’ve got nothing…Comey really struggled to make sure he kissed the right asses while doing the only thing he legally could do…Dismiss the investigation with prejudice! You don’t like it… too damn bad!!! Educate yourself.

      Reply
      1. A_Real_Einstein July 13, 2016

        Comey said that three emails that were deleted contained classified info and were marked as such. Period. End is story. Full stop. He confirmed what we already know in that there are two sets of rules. One set for the Clintons and another set for the rest of us. But hey what comes around goes around and everybody gets what they deserve in the end. Her luck will run out eventually. God is my witness. Very very bad karma surrounding these assholes.

        Reply
        1. johninPCFL July 14, 2016

          “They were border classified”, meaning that Fred Dingleberry drew an arc across a paragraph in the page border and wrote a little “C” next to it, but didn’t bother to mark the title “Classified”. Then he photocopied the page and sent it as an email attachment to a group. Whoever got it clicked “reply all”, starting the 52 chains comprising 110 emails in total.

          Reply
          1. A_Real_Einstein July 14, 2016

            None of the 110 emails were marked classified. However all either had content of classified information at the time or the content was later up classified. Only 3 emails were actually marked confidential (the lowest level of classified) and those emails had been deleted and were not part of the 30,000 emails she turned over to the state dept. Did she mishandle classified information? Without a doubt. She just was not prosecuted for political reasons. The Clintons are above the law.

            Reply
          2. johninPCFL July 15, 2016

            Above the law? Just like Powell and Rice (who used AOL and Google and deleted every trace of emails before they could be archived), every state department employee in contact with them via email, and apparently every person in the state department that Clinton had contact with via email.
            Seems like we’ll need to make room. Perhaps clear out a few thousand prison cells by releasing the murderers and rapists held there?

            Reply
          3. A_Real_Einstein July 15, 2016

            Different time, different technology, different rules and laws, different motivation. However if anyone acted as carelessly and negligently as HRC they should be investigated and charged. I have no issue with that. HRC should not be allowed anywhere near classified information moving forward. She has lost the priviledge.

            Reply
          4. JPHALL July 21, 2016

            What exactly were the rules and practices in 2008-12? They certainly were not like those we have today.

            Reply
          5. kep July 31, 2016

            God, you people are gullible

            Reply
          6. johninPCFL July 31, 2016

            No, just familiar with the law, and we ignore the “Fox news” spin and lies.
            Comey himself said no prosecutor would pursue the case, and the fact that none were properly marked bolsters that. Unfortunately for the idiots who were hanging all of their hopes for a whitehouse win on a prosecution, it won’t happen.
            Now we get to look forward to Trump’s prosecution for perjury on his many courtroom lies when stealing from his many vendors.

            Reply
          7. kep July 31, 2016

            Lol. Keep believing. I still can’t believe how stupid you people are

            Reply
          8. johninPCFL July 31, 2016

            It’s a shame you idiots never learn. She won’t be indicted. She may have her security clearance pulled, until she’s elected. The president is the only original classifier in the government. All the rest, including those working for Comey, are derivative classifiers.
            Why won’t Trump release his tax returns? Could it be that he’d be cited for contempt or perjury? Yeah. Lying on a financial statement for a court defined payment plan is one of those.

            Reply
        2. kep August 1, 2016

          110 emails classified. I just listened to the report. And Hillary still maintains that none were classified. You liberals live in an alternate reality.

          Reply
          1. A_Real_Einstein August 2, 2016

            Yes. 110 emails that were not marked but did contain content that was classified at the time. I congratulate you on your reading ability. However you nominated Bozo the Clown who makes HRC look like Mother Theresa. You actually picked the only candidate who can’t beat her.

            Reply
          2. kep August 2, 2016

            According to the report they were classified at the time. There was no “retroactive ” classification. ALL Hillary lies. She lies as easily as the Emperor does, but that doesn’t seem to matter to you liberals. Lying is just part of your genetic makeup.

            Reply
          3. A_Real_Einstein August 2, 2016

            Correct 110 emails contained classified content but we’re not marked at the time. Several were up classified later as well. Does not matter since Trump makes her look like Mother Theresa. You could have nominated anyone else and beaten her

            Reply
      2. kep July 31, 2016

        He made sure he kept his job by not inditing her. She is part of our ruling elite, something we are never supposed to have

        Reply
        1. esmensetoo August 5, 2016

          We always had a ruling elite. Who do you think Washington and Jefferson and the other founders were? People who probably would not have wanted you to have a vote.

          The fact that people like Obama and the Clintons — bright kids from non-elite families, actually have a chance to serve the country and govern with some sense of the interest of people from middle class and much more modest backgrounds in mind is something to celebrate. But the fact that there will always be wealthy interests working to try to undermine their efforts to do so is also a reality.

          Reply
          1. kep October 31, 2016

            Maybe this time around the FBI will get it right and Hillary will have a new supply of orange jumpsuits, with her own personal number stenciled on it.

            Reply
          2. esmensetoo October 31, 2016

            I know you think you are being clever. But you are applauding the idea of using law enforcement and our system of justice to persecute, imprison and, if your fellow Trump supporters are to be believed, engage in the murder of political opponents. Like some two-bit banana republic.

            The end of everything this nation has stood for since its founding.

            The destruction of the constitution and the world’s longest standing democracy. Plus, you are revealing that you have allowed yourself, through personal hatreds, pure emotion and an unwillingness (inability?) to apply common sense, pragmatism, knowledge, fair play and decency to your obligations as a citizen in a system of self governance — to be manipulated by one of the longest-standing political campaigns of personal destruction in our history. A campaign financed in large part by the same spoiled, greedy and fascistic class of wealthy and useless heirs Trump so perfectly represents.

            Perhaps people like you will win. Of course, you will win nothing but the opportunity to encourage the further destruction of our nation, the hopes and opportunities of our youngest generations and our economy — and provide more misery to the middle class that Bush II nearly destroyed and the Republican congress is determined to finish off.

            You idiots are angry at the Republican party you say — and your solution is to give them more power to do more harm?

            Trump hasn’t ever even claimed he has a plan — any plan at all on any issue at all — to do any of the HUUUGE things he promises. And you and his other supporters don’t care because what you really want is to see your own country destroyed.

            You make me sick.

            Reply
          3. kep October 31, 2016

            Now you are trying to be humorous? Liberals have already destroyed our country. Trump is America’s only hope considering the choices. The liberal communist utopian dream can not be allowed to continue. Our government has become too powerful, and too far corrupt. Hillary IS the single most corrupt individual in politics. And talk about the destruction of our Constitution, liberals have been trying to trash it for decades or more. Our rights have been eroded away under liberals, but, I must say that Bush did pass the biggest power grab in history with the Patriot act. The Democratic Party has become the new Amerikan Communist Party, and I will fight against that till my last breath. I would like to see the last 2 regimes tried for treason.
            Are you really that brainwashed not to be able to see what liberals have done to our country, our laws and Constitution, our way of life? The Emperor and Hillary both see our Constitution as something equated to toilet paper. It has no meaning to them, and they feel our laws are beneath them. Criminals ALL.

            Reply
    5. Independent1 July 13, 2016

      Posting it to the right dummkpf: Say there dummkopf, if Hillary is guilty of something, what about the 300 or so even dumber people in our government who would have violated classified information handling protocol just for having sent these emails to her knowing they were going to a non-government server address??? Are you suggesting that everyone be charged for mishandling classified emails?? In reality, the senders are the ones who are more guilty by even having sent Hillary the emails in the first place. (If, in fact, any mishandlinjg took place – WHICH IT DIDN’T!!!!)

      Reply
    6. King of America July 14, 2016

      That’s a great job of repeating right-wing falsehoods. But then, what else do you do?

      Reply
      1. kep July 31, 2016

        All I ever see on this site is falsehoods and lies that you liberals seem to embrace as gospel. So sad YOU can not think for yourselves.

        Reply
        1. King of America July 31, 2016

          Maybe you should read other people’s posts instead of your own, then. Just a thought!

          Reply
      2. Jane August 8, 2016

        I believe he lives in his parents’ basement, consumes beer and pretzels…and trolls with feigned indignation.

        Reply
    7. JPHALL July 21, 2016

      She did not set up the server. She hired someone to do that. Then paid a company to maintain it. So sorry for you and your false beliefs.

      Reply
    8. Jmz Nesky August 10, 2016

      Sounded more that you were talking about Dubya and his puppet master Chaney except they claimed theirs just… disappeared. And when it came out in the open as t what they were hiding, the entire RNC turned cricket on us.I love this ‘one-sided’ moralistic christian fact finding group.

      Reply
  7. FluffMuff July 13, 2016

    REALLY BIZARRE THAT REPUBLICANS HAVE NO SENSE OF HISTORY. None of Hillary’s mails were marked as classified documents must be; comey was quite clear. even the 3 he discussed had only a small c/meaning confidential next to a paragraph of a trailing email that was sent to HER. Comey also clearly stated she never lied once to the FBI; nor was evidence uncovered that her server was hacked. Comey stated clearly that none of the 120 mails that’contained’ classified info were marked as required; no markings appeared anywhere! the FBI did however later upclassify those emails; AFTER the fact.
    Seeing what other male SS have done including using private servers- by Rove and Bush Aids using a server named with an anagram for George Bush/ owned and managed by the RNC? The vanishing of 22 million ems FROM the White House server? During an investigation of the firing of 6 Federal attorney’s all democrats all prosecuting a case near to Republican’s hearts/investigated? then disappeared?
    Bush’s 7h year in office”the revelation on April 12, 2007 was shocking. Responding to congressional demands for emails in connection with its investigation into the partisan firing of eight U.S. attorneys, the White House announced that as many as five million emails, covering a two-year span, had been lost. Later found to be 22 million.

    h private accounts controlled by the Republican National Committee and were only supposed to be used for dealing with non-administration political campaign work to avoid violating ethics laws. Yet congressional investigators already had evidence private emails had been used for government business, including to discuss the firing of one of the U.S. attorneys. The RNC accounts were used by 22 White House staffers, including then-Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, who reportedly used his RNC email for 95 percent of his communications.

    As the Washington Post reported, “Under federal law, the White House is required to maintain records, including e-mails, involving presidential decision- making and deliberations.” But suddenly millions of the private RNC emails had gone missing; emails that were seen as potentially crucial evidence by Congressional investigators.

    The White House email story broke on a Wednesday. Yet on that Sunday’s Meet The Press, Face The Nation, and Fox News Sunday, the topic of millions of missing White House emails did not come up. At all. (The story did get covered on ABC’s This Week.)

    By comparison, not only did every network Sunday news show this week cover the story about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emails, but they were drowning in commentary. Between Meet the Press, Face The Nation, This Week, and Fox News Sunday, Clinton’s “email” or “emails” were referenced more than 100 times on the programs, according to Nexis transcripts. Talk about saturation coverage.”
    So YES, Republicans are engaging in Political Aggravated Rape of the First Female Candidate for President…..

    Reply
    1. A. D. Reed July 13, 2016

      Bizarre that Republicans have no sense of history? Not so bizarre, if you consider that they have no sense at all.

      Reply
    2. Independent1 July 13, 2016

      And what many have neglected to point out, probably on purpose, is that if Hillary is guilty of mishandling classified emails, what about the 300 or so people in the State Department and elsewhere in our government, who sent her these potentially classified emails knowing they were going to a non-government email address – without THEM taking that into account – basically setting themselves up for mishandling classified information charges also!!!

      And also, too little has been made of the fact that during Hillary’s tenure at the State Department, the systems that Hillary would have been using to handle these emails had she used a government server, WERE IN FACT, hacked a number of times by the Russians and Chinese.; while there’s no evidence that here private servers were ever exposed to hacking.

      Reply
      1. Jane August 8, 2016

        Oh I love this. Of course!

        Reply
        1. Independent1 August 8, 2016

          And notice these comments from CIA Director Morell I believe just yesterday:

          He also defended Clinton’s misuse of classified information in her use of a private email server while secretary of state, saying “when she saw those e-mails, she did not see classification markings.”

          “So when she says there wasn’t classified information, that’s what she means,” he said. “It wasn’t marked. And the two that were marked with little ‘c’s,’ she doesn’t remember. So she’s not trying to mislead anybody.”

          Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Benghazi-Hillary-Clinton-Morell/2016/08/07/id/742478/#ixzz4Glmggo9F

          Reply
          1. Jane August 8, 2016

            Yes…I’ve never understood why they call her a liar all the time. They also said she lied about Benghazi because she told the victim families that the attack could have been inspired by an anti-Muslim video. That may or may not be true but she’s also right when she asks “what difference does it make?” as if she has the inside scoop of what goes on in the irrational thinking of a terrorist. Whether it be an American made video, the Koran, ISIS or schizophrenia, the point is not what inspired the attack but that it was, indeed, a terrorist attack. None of us know what inspires such horrific acts. We all view the world in our own way. It’s remarkable that people can’t forgive her for saying that. She was only trying to provide comfort when everyone was in shock. And it was a view held at that very specific time. And…it just could have been true. We will never know.

            Reply
          2. Independent1 August 8, 2016

            Hillary didn’t lie about Benghazi, the video was the original motivation for the attack. What’s a shame was the mother of one of the victims who played right into the GOP’s hands by calling Hillary a liar.

            From CIA Director Morell again:

            Hillary Clinton’s assertion to the grieving mother of a Benghazi, Libya, victim that the deadly 2012 assault was caused by an anti-Islam video was as “true” as the fact it was a terror strike; according to ex-CIA acting director Michael Morell. Morell said “the video did play a role in that attack, and Republicans don’t want people to believe that.”

            Morell said in 2014, the Federal Bureau of Investigation testified to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that it believed “the video was a motivation in this attack. Abu Khattala, who is the only person arrested, said that the video was a motivation.”

            See more on Director Morell’s comments go here:

            http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Benghazi-Hillary-Clinton-Morell/2016/08/07/id/742478/#ixzz4GmICe2D7

            Reply
          3. Jane August 8, 2016

            Thanks for this independent1. I lost a few friends over this argument. Everyone needs to know these facts. Remarkable how the GOP can just be so (for lack of a better word) evil…truly. Hillary has been nothing but gracious throughout.

            Reply
    3. kep July 31, 2016

      Does the info you are fed by your liberal handlers that skewed? I listened to the report and I heard something like 78 classified documents were found. Some so classified that the senator from Utah said that some were so classified that he couldn’t see what they were.

      Reply
  8. Liberal Rabies July 14, 2016

    Hillary, Bernie and Lizzie – DNC corruption city!

    Reply
  9. David July 15, 2016

    Of course she wasn’t going to get indicted. She’s a Clinton and the fix was on!

    Reply
  10. Jennifer2864 July 20, 2016

    I am profiting about 6k-8k dollars /month for freelance jobs i do at home. For everybody looking to work easy computer-based work for few hrs a day from comfort of your home and make decent payment while doing it… Try this job http://Self90.com

    fdgdfgf

    Reply
  11. tyra.valentine July 25, 2016

    I am making approximately $6k-$8k /month from freelancing online. If you are willing to complete easy computer-based work for 2h-5h a day from your house and earn valuable profit for doing it… Try this gig http://self92.com

    gfghgf

    Reply
  12. Marilyn5632 July 29, 2016

    I profit in the range of 6,000-8,000 dollars a month from freelancing online. If you are willing to do easy at home jobs for 2h-5h /day from your couch at home and make solid paycheck while doing it… Try this gig http://ow.ly/bAic302l4rr

    fghfg

    Reply

Leave a Comment

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.