Hillary Clinton

Documents: Hillary Clinton Told Employees Not to Use Private Emails

Hypocrisy confirmed.

|

Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton

Fox News has confirmed that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prohibited her employees from conducting official government business via their personal email addresses—even though Clinton herself flagrantly broke this rule, in violation of federal policy.

Catherine Herridge of Fox News reports that an official State Department document from 2011 made clear that the use of personal email addresses was strictly forbidden:

Fox News has exclusively obtained an internal 2011 State Department cable that shows Secretary of State Clinton's office told employees not to use personal email for security reasons, while at the same time, HRC conducted all government business on a private account.   Sent to Diplomatic and Consular Staff in June 2011, the unclassified cable, with Clinton's electronic signature, makes clear to "avoid conducting official Department from your personal e-mail accounts"  and employees should not "auto-forward Department email to personal email accounts which is prohibited by Department policy."

Clinton did not abide by this rule. She frequently made use of a private email address shielded from federal recording practices, as Reason's Peter Suderman reported earlier. The fact that Cinton now wants to make amends by releasing some of the emails is irrelevant. Whichever ones her staff doesn't approve for public consumption are exactly the ones the American people need to see most desperately.

Now it also appears that she's a hypocrite—and one who has plainly broken the law, according to National Review.

Advertisement

NEXT: Jesse Walker on Philip K. Dick's Androids

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wonder if any of the emails on that server contain pics/photos/emails regarding Bill’s trips to the tropics.

    1. Probably much more mundane stuff, like where the next drone strike was going to land in Pakistan. Makes one wonder of one of the server administrators in Mumbai ever tipped anyone off?

    2. Hey at least we know whore island exists

      1. Noblet: Oh, and remember I need the permission slips for this week’s trip to Good Time Island.

        Student: Where’s your permission slip?

        Noblet: SHUT YOUR DIRTY LITTLE MOUTH.

      2. Hm? Sorry I was picturing Whore Island.

        1. I think of it as The Adventures of Bill and the Billionaire on Sex Slave Island.

      3. I’m Spartacus too!

    3. Hey at least we know whore island exists

      1. And it’s in Spokane.

  2. Fox News has confirmed that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prohibited her employees from conducting official government business via their personal email addresses?even though Clinton herself flagrantly broke this rule, in violation of federal policy.

    Of course she did. When I was called in to the CEOs office– an organization that had myriad rules about personal emails, HIPAA and the like, I’d walk to his computer, and there it sat, logged in, all his personal shit up, email open, the whole shebang.

    It’s called special dispensation.

    1. I don’t think the scandal is using the work computer to access private stuff. The scandal is using private email services for work correspondence.

      1. No, I know that. I think you misunderstood me. Or, I used the word ‘personal emails’ which confused you on my point.

        CEO of a major hospital is the captain of an organization that makes it very clear to its employees that you will observe a certain ‘etiquette’ when using the computer. Don’t use outside email for Hospital business as it violates HIPAA. Don’t walk away from your computer leaving it logged in– leaving it vulnerable to passers-by– it violates HIPAA.

        Send daily memos with the CEOs name at the bottom iterating such.

        My apologies.

        1. The difference being that hospital administrators have access to a ton of deeply personal, sensitive information. I mean, what could Clinton have possibly stored in her private correspondence?

          /politico, probably

          1. You mean other than the most sought after dick pics EVAH?…

            1. The anti-fappening?

            2. Clit pics, bro.

              1. You sure about that?

                1. There are many who doubt…

    2. Wait, this was confirmed by Fox News? That means the left will just say Fox made it up and only drooling mouth-breathers watch that channel.

      1. Hey, once you get the drooling mouth-breather vote, the Electoral College is just a formality.

  3. ith Clinton’s electronic signature, makes clear to “avoid conducting official Department from your personal e-mail accounts” and employees should not “auto-forward Department email to personal email accounts which is prohibited by Department policy.”

    When I read this, I started shaking and sweating.

    What are the symptoms of PTSD?

  4. Fake scand… Oh, nevermind.

  5. Has she been arrested yet?

    1. It’s not Christmas today, ProL. Check the calendar.

      1. I think you meant it’s not April Fool’s day.

        1. No, seeing her in cuffs wouldn’t be a joke, it would be a glorious present. So Christmas is the right holiday.

          1. 50 shades of Hillary? You’re one sick dude.

              1. Can I ever UNsee that?

              2. Wow. She really needs to ditch those pant suits.

  6. Now it also appears that she’s a hypocrite?and one who has plainly broken the law

    Now? NOW?

    Has anyone changed their opinion on Hillary’s character due to these revelations?

    1. At this point, what difference does it make?h

      1. No controlling legal authority. /Al Gore

    2. Nope – just confirming.

      I would call this Clintonesque.

      1. Old hat. Arkansas real estate springs to mind, for some reason.

  7. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here… ……

    http://www.wixjob.com

    1. Do I have to use a personal email?

    2. I was tempted with the cash bit — but you lost me at “more time with your family.”

    3. “Wound” is right…
      From my personal collection… my reply…

      http://www.plusaf.com/linkedin…..esults.jpg

  8. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here… ……

    http://www.wixjob.com

    1. Does the job involve wounding lasagna?

  9. From my perspective the only reason this is getting any traction at all is due to Warren supporters salivating. Everyone who is not in that camp are giving the boilerplate “but BUUUUUSH!” response, with the slight difference of it being Jeb Bush in this case, who is not a federal employee and did not break the law. But he’s a Republican, so that’s good enough.

    I cannot reiterate enough how fucking sick and tired I am of “but Bush” being the universal retort: whataboutism for the 21st century, and just as bullshit.

    1. I believe the retort is the about the Bush 43 White House and the 22 million email messages they “lost” that were in a private domain – http://www.gwb43.com

      1. Speaking of being sick and tired.

        1. WASHINGTON ? The White House said Wednesday that it may have lost what could amount to thousands of messages sent through a private e-mail system used by political guru Karl Rove and at least 50 other top officials, an admission that stirred anger and dismay among congressional investigators.

          The e-mails were considered potentially crucial evidence in congressional inquiries launched by Democrats into the role partisan politics may have played in such policy decisions as the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.

          http://articles.latimes.com/20…..a-emails12

          They all do it.

          1. And some don’t have any shame about doing it, even after condemning others for doing it: http://theweek.com/speedreads/…..nstitution

          2. If only one Team gave a fuck about honor and integrity and actually being held accountable to the American people.

            Your Team is just as bad as the other Team. Congratulations, you piece of shit.

            1. Hans, because Rickman just looks more evil.

          3. “… but Buuuuuuuush!”

            Yeah, so?

            I never voted for Bush. I don’t care if “they all do it” nor do I find universal disrespect for the rule of law an excuse in any way whatsoever.

          4. “They all do it.”

            Did you read your own link idiot?

            “The White House said an effort was underway to see whether the messages could be recovered from the computer system, which was operated and paid for by the Republican National Committee as part of an avowed effort to separate political communications from those dealing with official business.

            It’s illegal under Federal law to use official government email for political communications, dip shit. Your link points out that the Bush Administration was following the law.

            “The e-mails were sent through a communications system created in conjunction with the RNC early in the Bush administration. Rove and others were given special laptop computers and other communications devices to use instead of the government communications system when dealing with political matters.

            The parallel system was designed to avoid running afoul of the Hatch Act, which prohibits using government resources for partisan purposes, White House officials have said.

            But evidence has emerged that system users sometimes failed to maintain such separation and used the private system when communicating about government business.

            They were guilty of occasionally failing to switch over to the Official system. They didn’t refuse to use their official accounts.

            1. Did you read your own link idiot?

              Shriek practically never reads his own links. And his reading comprehension is so poor that it doesn’t matter even when he does since the point so often escapes him. BUT BOOOOOOSH is all he’s got.

              1. “Shriek practically never reads his own links”

                Maybe 8% of them…

            2. You dumbasses. Rove was hiding his political firings of US Attorneys on those servers.

              1. Hey…they only fired 8% of those guys……

              2. firings of US Attorneys

                Wow, talk about a fake scandal!

              3. Palin’s Buttplug:

                You dumbasses. Rove was hiding his political firings of US Attorneys on those servers.

                Hillary Clinton never fired anyone.

                Selective outrage is always the best kind, ins’t it?

            3. The Hatch Act is such BS. The only people that ever get held to its standards are Republicans.

              1. I know a guy that “works” at Social Security that ran a campaign from his day job office and got called out on it. Suspended for six months. I love SSA – can’t fire anybody. The dudes that would look at porn all day got in absolutely no trouble and are probably still doing it to this day.

      2. Tu quoque!!

        1. Hillary killed Vince Foster you know. Why not try her for that?

          My source is wingnut.com.

          1. Are you actually going to advocate for another Billary presidency?

            1. Hil-Dog voted for the PATRIOT Act and the Iraq War. The bitch is dead to me. Although she finally admitted her mistakes that makes her only slightly better than a Bushpig – who never will admit how bad they fucked up.

              1. Fuck off, turd.

              2. So did Kerry, and you voted for him.

                So did Obama, through re-authorization of the Patriot Act and “leaving” Iraq only when the Iraqi Gov told him GTFO. And you backed him – twice.

                Tell us again how you aren’t Ready for Hillary.

                1. Bush vs Kerry was no doubt the worst pair of candidates in my lifetime. The drab monotonous bore vs the village idiot.

                  Had to go with the least worst that time.

                  1. Bush’s tone was rather rustic and colorful, unlike that drooling idiot Kerry…

                    1. Kerry would have won the election hands down if he’d showed a sense of humor. People couldn’t relate to him.

                      Perhaps if he replied to him being buzzed in a debate with a “you rang, sir” and grumbled occasionally when somebody said something he didn’t appreciate, people would have laughed and voted for him.

                    2. Perhaps if he replied to him being buzzed in a debate with a “you rang, sir”

                      That’s not right. It just isn’t.

                    3. Damn straight that’s not right, Lurch had a hella more personality than that stiff Kerry.

                  2. Michael Badnarik?

                  3. Yeah, I had some problems with Michael Badnarik too, but he was certainly better than either Bush or Kerry.

                    That is who you meant when you referred to the “least worst,” right?

                    1. Only after I posted this did I realize that MiloMinderbinder had the same idea, an hour earlier. Sorry about that.

                    2. Seam on you.

          2. Your source for everything is the one brain cell floating around in your head.

          3. My guns have killed fewer people that Hillary Clinton’s botched land deal.

            Are the Park Police qualified to conduct a murder investigation?

      3. This is how teenagers debate…well the other guy did it???

      4. Those emails were all found.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..91557.html

        Also, at the time of their “loss” guess who came out against “secret emails?”

        Hillary. Prager played audio of it today.

        Which means she cannot plead ignorance.

  10. Clinton did not abide by this rule.

    Bitch!

    1. She also criticized Bush WH’s secret emails.

      So it really is pure hypocrisy.

      And of course, those Bush emails were all found.

      1. More to the point, as JWatts notes, the e-mails weren’t official U.S. correspondence.

  11. Prediction:

    The people who already hate Hillary will continue hating Hillary, adding this to their pile of reasons.
    The people who already support Hillary will continue supporting Hillary, coming up with a reason to dismiss this or ignore it entirely.
    The people who already didn’t care about Hillary either way will continue not caring either way about Hillary, and switch the channel to Dancing On The Stars whenever any news reports about this come up.

    1. Dancing On The Stars?

      Are they doing the hot foot?

    2. On the contrary. I see this story giving a lot of even Democrats pause.

      Many, many people are very bored with the apparent inevitability of a Clinton nomination.
      They are thirsty for someone new.

      Nevermind that the coalition Obama has built: Blacks, Hispanics, and Public Sector Unions, is not really the ideal constituency for a rich elderly white woman. Clinton would have to rebuild the Democratic coalition of the 90s. But she never has had Bill’s charisma.

      1. But she never has had Bill’s charisma.

        She doesn’t even have McConnell’s charisma, just the same droopy jowls.

      2. Many, many people are very bored with the apparent inevitability of a Clinton nomination.

        That was true before this story came out. This story changes nothing.

        Nevermind that the coalition Obama has built: Blacks, Hispanics, and Public Sector Unions

        Wait a minute, blacks, Hispanics, and unions weren’t overwhelmingly Democrat in the 1990s?

        Obama hasn’t built shit. He was the right guy with the right skin color at the right time, took what was given him in his lap (an electorate utterly sick of Republicans) and pissed much of it away.

        1. Hispanics were much more evenly divided in the 1990s. Obama has united, really, all racial minorities behind the democrats.

          Whites vote like 30% Democrat and 70% Republican now.
          He’s turned the D’s into the party of minorities, unions, and a few progressive white liberals on the coasts.

          1. BO didn’t do shit to bring Hispanics into the fold. That’s been accomplished by scaremongering about immigration.

            I wouldn’t call scaring everyone else off to be “building a coalition”. Obama hasn’t built shit, I repeat.

            1. Well, he might not have built anything lasting beyond himself, if the D’s nominate a rich elderly white women, who will turn most of those voters off.

              My point is he’s basically ruined the party for Hillary and her ilk.

        2. Nevermind that the coalition Obama has built: Blacks, Hispanics, and Public Sector Unions

          Obama’s coalition-building has lost the Dems a shitload of state-level positions, and control of Congress.

          What a frickin’ 3d-chess playing mastermind he is.

      3. Hillary leaked this herself. Her meeting with Warren on 2/17 was to let her know that this could happen and to be ready to step in if it becomes too obvious Hillary can’t win.

    3. On the contrary. I see this story giving a lot of even Democrats pause.

      Many, many people are very bored with the apparent inevitability of a Clinton nomination.
      They are thirsty for someone new.

      Nevermind that the coalition Obama has built: Blacks, Hispanics, and Public Sector Unions, is not really the ideal constituency for a rich elderly white woman. Clinton would have to rebuild the Democratic coalition of the 90s. But she never has had Bill’s charisma.

      1. And the Democrat constituency of the ’90s isn’t coming back since working class whites have totally abandoned the Democrats and show no signs of returning.

        1. Working class whites had left the Dem party long before the 90s. Don’t forget Bill Clinton never won a majority of the popular vote; he got Democrats and a few moderates, then sat back and watched Perot peel off conservatives from the GOP.

    4. Sagittarius A*|3.5.15 @ 6:34PM|#
      “Prediction:”

      Prediction:Saggy will continue to lick Clinton ass.

  12. But what about Scott Walker??! There’s a double-standard!! You’re all shills for TEAM RED!

    /Bo

    1. you and your fellow conservatives are all shills for Team Red. It is so obvious and you do not even know it. I pity all of you conservatives on this site.

      1. I pity the fool who won’t eat my breakfast cereal!

        /Mr. T

    2. you and your fellow conservatives are all shills for Team Red. It is so obvious and you do not even know it. I pity all of you conservatives on this site.

      1. Twice because it’s so nice. Yes.

        1. You are obviously NOT Ready for Hillary!

    3. Walker has an excuse though. He didn’t graduate from college so he’s to stupid to know how email retention works.

      -Hill shill

      1. He didn’t graduate from college so he’s to stupid to know how email retention works.

        FIFY

        /botard the hotard

        1. I like how Bo has chimed in as some kind of expert on corporate and pubsec email policies and challenged FedGov employees and private sector workers that refute every one of his idiotic claims.

          His entire defense has been a professor at his school that uses private email as opposed to the school system’s to set up meetings. As if that’s anywhere remotely like a company VP conducting all of his business through private channels his company has no access to.

          1. “I like how Bo has chimed in as some kind of expert on corporate and pubsec email policies”

            And he’s never actually had a job. its amazing how much he knows!

            1. And just think, as soon as he graduates from college he’ll be smarter than Scott Walker!

              1. Yeah?!? Well.. at least Bo believes in dinosaurs.. and cavemen. Take that, Walker shill..

    4. Bo makes the worst analogies of anyone I’ve ever spoken to. He seriously thinks Walker arguing it isn’t a politicians place to get involved in conversations about evolution is the same thing as Hillary refusing to answer questions about her outright disregard for Federal law.

      1. In Bo’s defense, I think his analogies are bad because he’s an idiot. So in some respects, he’s doing the best he can and should at least get a participation trophy.

      2. That was one of the most extreme stretches I’ve seen around here in quite a while.

      3. I think you guys need to rename Bo, cause the real Bo is/was the greatest athlete of the 20th century. He is also a decent guy. So stop besmirching the name…

        1. “Bo is/was the greatest athlete of the 20th century”

          Hell yes he was. and some people still try and claim “car jumping” aint a sport.

      4. He really argued that?

        Oh, Dear God!

        1. For dozens and dozens of posts.

          He was also telling us that all of us who actually have jobs are just dead wrong about the company email security that we work with every day.

  13. “Now it also appears that she’s a hypocrite”
    You’re entirely too kind.

    1. She appears to be a hypocrite the way the sun appears to be in the sky.

      1. And that’s the best you can say about her appearance.
        Lying piece of crap comes to mind. Nasty bitch fits nicely.

      2. Except the sun is only in the sky half of the time.

        1. Although only visible half the time, isn’t this I’m still technically in the sky at all times?

          1. Depends on how you define “the sky” I suppose. A definition including things that are beneath the surface of the earth would be difficult to accept though.

            1. Russel Crowe and Mel Gibson beg to differ.

        2. Sagittarius A*|3.5.15 @ 7:52PM|#
          “Except the sun is only in the sky half of the time.”

          Lick that ass, saggy!

          1. Acknowledging that the sun is not in the sky at night makes me a Hillary supporter. OK.

        3. The sun is technically not ‘in the sky’.

          However, granting the common meaning of the phrase, it is ‘in the sky’ 100% of the time.

          1. Twinkle, twinkle, little star,
            How I wonder what you are!
            Up above the world so high,
            Like a diamond in the sky.

            When the blazing sun is gone,
            When he nothing shines upon,
            Then you show your little light,
            Twinkle, twinkle, all the night.

            Then the traveller in the dark
            Thanks you for your tiny spark;
            He could not see which way to go,
            If you did not twinkle so.

            In the dark blue sky you keep,
            And often through my curtains peep,
            For you never shut your eye
            ‘Till the sun is in the sky.

            As your bright and tiny spark
            Lights the traveller in the dark,
            Though I know not what you are,
            Twinkle, twinkle, little star.

        4. That would only be true if it actually entered the Earth at some point, which it does not. The sun is always in the sky, just not always in the part of the sky that you can see.

    2. The SNUKE

  14. A bit off-topic but I saw this link via *cough cough* Conservapedia*cough cough* about why the media put the pressure on Hillary Clinton http://www.conservativenewsand…..cut-loose/ Some said it’s to free a free path for Elizabeth Warren.

    1. If I had to bet on a leaker here, it’s either Elijah Cummings or its Leon Podesta. They want it for different reasons though.

      Cummings wants it because he realizes Gowdy is a better chairman of the oversight committee than Issa ever dreamed of being and will get to the bottom of the Benghazi mess. He brought this up to create a larger email situation so Benghazi can get lost in the shuffle when Gowdy starts looking at the bigger picture.

      Podesta because he wants to get as much dirt on his star out there as he can before she begins her official candidacy to get all of her potential D opponents to announce and to make it “old news” by the time the general election comes around.

      Those are my thoughts.

      1. “he wants to get as much dirt on his star out there as he can before she begins her official candidacy”

        This is most likely the main reason the NYT and other media outlets have decided to actually ‘cover’ this story, unlike other scandals like benghazi, where there was willful obfuscation by the media for a year or more.

        Basically, get all hillary’s trash out in the front yard, and burn it up. By the time there’s an actual campaign? it will have been hashed over to the point where no one cares.

        The issue with the email thing though is that it may actually have been criminal = the fact she set up a server in her home to prevent oversight or any discovery of official communications is straight up, blatant evasion. It can be spun 100 different ways to make it less damaging in the public eye, but from a legal POV i think she’s going to face some problems. You can only sweep so much shit under the rug.

        1. The political ramifications are all Hitlery needs to worry about. She is well above the law.

        2. This is also alienating a lot of techies. When Gawker and Wired are ripping a Democratic nominee for email security idiocy, you know it’s bad.

          1. ” Gawker and Wired are ripping a Democratic nominee “

            I glanced at Gawker, and the first sentence of Sam ‘douche-hose’ Biddle’s piece was bemoaning the damage that Hillary’s acts “may have done to Obama’s vaunted transparency agenda

            I threw up in my mouth

            1. Have you updated recently?

            2. Fwiw, if you need to contact me, my email address is my name here ^ at a g-mail kind of place.

            3. Fwiw, if you need to contact me, my email address is my name here ^ at a g-mail kind of place.

            4. Fwiw, if you need to contact me, my email address is my name here ^ at a g-mail kind of place.

              1. Cool, looks like a created a squirrel in javascript

                1. That happened because I tried to async reply to the same comment twice.. weird

                  1. FYI = i just got a bubble message from Greasemonkey just now that it updated to 0.9.4 all by itself.

      2. I’m not sure it works that way. By that logic, Eliot Spitzer would be a viable candidate b/c his scandal is old and well-known.

        The Hillary campaign will try to spin it as old news, but the public will not buy into that.

    2. “Some said it’s to free a free path for Elizabeth Warren”

      Heap big squaw on warpath?

      1. Potential for the first fake Indian as President. What is the demographic on that? 100 people in the entire country?

    3. “Some said it’s to free a path for Elizabeth Warren”

      lol

      i don’t think anyone is really that stupid. Well, salon writers, maybe, but no one who actually matters.

      1. Note the meeting they had on 2/17.

  15. Fox News has confirmed that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prohibited her employees from conducting official government business via their personal email addresses?even though Clinton herself flagrantly broke this rule, in violation of federal policy.

    Look, what’s the point of being the big cheese, able to use your authority to ignore the rules, if all the plebs who toil under you can do the same.

    Hillary’s *special*.

  16. The right is falling into the Clinton trap, AGAIN.

    Bill Clinton was like Muhammed Ali–he danced just beyond his opponents’ reach, taunting them and baiting them with trivial, technical-only scandals which no one cared about except the right-wing, causing them to waste their energy chasing phantoms and making themselves look like small-minded losers. Then, when the you were exhausted from running after him, he would circle in and bop you. Meanwhile, while you exhausted your energy chasing smoke, he got his business done–a world-history-class economy that worked for almost everybody, major funding increases for basic science and hi-tech, reproductive freedom, more liberal gays-in-military policies (“don’t ask-don’t tell”, for all its flaws, was an advance in gay rights over its previous policy), moderate-to-liberal judges, etc.

    Now it appears Hillary is taking a leaf from his book. No one cares which account Hillary used for her email! Her opposition will exhaust itself chasing this smoky, phantom “scandal” and all they will gain from it is to alienate the public from themselves.

    This so-called scandal will end up INCREASING Hillary’s popularity, and will make her opponents look like nasty, trivial-minded “gotcha” politicians. Just watch.

    1. I’m watching.

    2. Hillary is nowhere nearly as smart as Bill.

      1. I believe she’s technically much, much smarter than Bill. And Bill knew it.

        Bill was like the dim-witted front-man and lead singer that the chicks swooned over. Hillary was the drummer who was actually the rare and little-known musical center and creative force behind the band.

        1. So Bill was like Christian Vander?

          1. No, Hillary was like Christian Vander. Bill was like Milli-Vanilli.

            1. Yeah, got it backwards. Early-onset dementia.

        2. You don’t know them well then. Bill is the ultimate wonk politician. He can stand up and speak extemporaneously in detail on any legislation or political subject. He is hands down the most knowledgeable politician in 50 years.

          1. “Bill Clinton stood up and said “hey everyone, I’m full of shit and how do you like that?” and the public said “well, at least he’s honest””.

            George Carlin

            1. “It makes no difference which one of us you vote for. Either way, your planet is doomed. Doomed!”
              “Well, a refreshingly frank response there from Senator Bob Dole.”

          2. My favourite anecdote about Bill and Hillary is one where they were driving in a limo through some town– in Arkansas, I believe. Passing a gas station, Bill spotted a guy working there that Hillary dated while in school.

            “Look at that, ” said Bill, “If you’d have married him, you’d be the wife of a gas station attendant!”

            “No, ” responded Hillary, “He’d have been the President”

            The rest of the limo ride was a place of quiet reflection.

          3. Yet he can’t remember the laws about perjury.

            1. Yet he can’t remember the laws about perjury.

              But he knew exactly how many people in America cared about the laws about perjury.

              1. 8%, right?

        3. The fact is both Hillary and Bill are extremely smart. Off-the-charts smart.

          1. So why did she lose to Obama?

            1. That wasn’t a contest of wits, it was a contest of identity politics in a party whose engine literally runs on identity politics.

              In the larger picture of identity politics, it wasn’t her turn. This time, it is.

              1. Rochambaux Identity Politics: Black beats Women.

          2. Another story that was told by someone who worked with Bill was how smart he was about politics. The keyword here is “politics”.

            Bill has an encyclopedic knowledge about voting districts, demographics, where votes come from, where they materialize, how to target specific voting blocs.

            It’s too bad he didn’t know anything about economics or well, anything else.

            1. It’s too bad he didn’t know anything about economics or well, anything else.

              Translation – Bill was no whackjob goldbug Doomsday prepper.

              1. It is a really sad state of affairs when whackjob goldbug Doomsday preppers are more knowledgeable about economics than the president of the United States.

                I can understand them knowing more than you about, well, anything, but the president?

                That’s sad.

                1. Indeed. Doomsday prepper’s aren’t Keynesian Kool-Aid drinkers.

                  Which means they know more about economics than anyone who is – include Billy boy, Obummer and Krugnuts.

          3. The fact is both Hillary and Bill are extremely smart. Off-the-charts smart.

            I agree Hillary is smart, but I wonder why her book smarts haven’t translated into success in any government position she’s held. She is one of the worst Secretaries of State we’ve had in decades, so her intelligence doesn’t seem to help her much.

            1. Condi Rice is smart but her two terms as NSA and SoS were total disasters. Condi missed all the buildup to 9/11 and the Middle East crumbled while we pissed trillions away.

              1. Condi missed all the buildup to 9/11

                Which mostly happened on Madeleine Albright’s watch.

              2. Condi missed all the buildup to 9/11 and the Middle East crumbled while we pissed trillions away.

                Wait, what? How on Earth was Condoleeza Rice at fault for missing the buildup to 9/11? She was the National Security Advisor at the time, which basically means she’s just a senior aide that offers some advice to the president and sits in on NSA meetings. Condoleeza Rice wasn’t running any intelligence agency or defense agency that conceivably could have thwarted 9/11.

                You might as well ask why the Secretary of Education didn’t help us catch Bin Laden sooner.

            2. Irish for the win.

              Her smarts haven’t translated into success. Could not be better put. She is a scheming, conniving, cold blooded bitch. That is her talent. As for accomplishing anything whatsoever she is a complete failure.

              I love how the turdpolisher responds not with examples of her success but with ‘but…but….Condi Rice!’.

              Tell us turdpolisher, in what way does this exonerate the Hildebeast?

            3. Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, and Lyndon Johnson all had high IQs as well. A lot of good that did them as president.

              1. Hoover and Wilson were also very bright. James Garfield could write in Greek with one hand and simultaneously write in Latin with the other.

          4. I agree Bill is smart. Hillary? You could scour the Internet for a week and I doubt you’d find three statements that she’s made that show she’s smart. That is, simple declarative sentences that show a grasp of a situation and/or it’s solution.

            Being able to dodge political crises and using empty statements as a delay strategy is the kind of smart we don’t need any more of.

            1. I agree. I see cunning and ambition, but not an excess of brains.

              1. Are you saying she is a cunning runt?

            2. Count me in on this. I think it’s the case that everyone thinks Hillary is smart because everyone else thinks Hillary is smart. At the end of the day, there’s really no evidence in support of the thesis.

        4. hey, That’s my Dave Grohl killed Kurt Cobain conspiracy theory.

          1. Unfortunately it doesn’t work. In the end, Cobain would have wanted to kill Grohl. Why would the guy who would have been successful no matter where he threw his hat want to knock Cobain out of the way?

            1. Good point.

            2. Cobain was stealing all of Grohl’s thunder, plus Grohl is young, naive, unsure of his own talents, yet feels trapped by Nirvana-obligations,his only way out is to stage a Morrison/Presley/Cooke/ Hendrix/Joplin/Gaye/Cass/Hutchinson/ Carradine/Williams type thing to take what by right was his and his alone.

              It’s a conspiracy theory it doesn’t have to make sense.

          2. “hey, That’s my Dave Grohl killed Kurt Cobain conspiracy theory.”

            I think we have to look at Pat Smear.

            Darby Crash “killed himself” when Pat Smear was in The Germs, too.

            At the very least, we should be asking ourselves, what is it about Pat Smear that makes lead singers want to kill themselves?

            1. I didn’t know men could have a pap smear.

        5. So, Bill is like W, and Hillary is like Karl Rove?

          Uh-huh.

    3. …causing them to waste their energy chasing phantoms and making themselves look like small-minded losers.

      Billary’s masterful shuck-and-jive made for an amusing eight years, even for a teenager. In civics class, we discussed whether the blowjob itself was the issue, or whether the lying was the issue.

      If Bill were a virus, he’d be herpes. You have to kill the host.

    4. No one cares which account Hillary used for her email!

      Probably. But plenty care which account she used for “her” email.

    5. This is quite possibly the dumbest comment I’ve ever read on this website, especially the world class economy part.

      The economic growth began under Reagan and Clinton benefited from a tech bubble. Moreover, even if you believe government policy in the Clinton years caused the economy to boom (which I don’t) Clinton had a Republican congress for most of his term. How do you determine economic growth is the result of Clinton’s policies rather than an adverse Congress? Answer: You can’t.

      This so-called scandal will end up INCREASING Hillary’s popularity, and will make her opponents look like nasty, trivial-minded “gotcha” politicians.

      She was running classified state department emails through an unsecure server in direct contravention of Federal Law. If you think it’s ‘nasty’ to go after someone for this sort of idiocy, then I don’t know what to say. Especially given that she appears to have been using her foundation to solicit bribes from corporations and dictatorships.

      1. Nonsense. The budget surpluses of the late nineties were a direct result of the Omnibus of 1993 which not a single GOPer voted for. It was the largest spending cut in history combined with a tax hike on the top rate to 39.6%. The stated goal was deficit reduction (and it worked) and a secondary benefit was an incredibly strong US Dollar which sent crude oil down to $10 barrel.

        You are way out of your league with me on this subject.

        1. There hasn’t been a federal budget surplus since 1957. The claims of surpluses result from adding the Social Security tax surplus into the federal revenue, which is improper since it’s actually debt (held by the SSTF), not revenue.

          And the relatively small deficits were due to a booming economy (due to the Internetification of business and opening of new markets) and the end of the Cold War.

          1. Not quite true – this article looks at the budget both ways:

            Clinton’s large budget surpluses also owe much to the Social Security tax on payrolls. Social Security taxes now bring in more than the cost of current benefits, and the “Social Security surplus” makes the total deficit or surplus figures look better than they would if Social Security wasn’t counted. But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while.

            http://www.factcheck.org/2008/…..r-clinton/

            1. Palin’s Buttplug|3.5.15 @ 8:21PM|#
              “Not quite true – this article looks at the budget both ways:”

              Turd, you’ve been called on this more times than you can count. Do you think anyone here buys your continued lying?
              Fuck off.

            2. The mental midget tries again.

              Let’s take a look at the CBO data directly.

              http://www.cbo.gov/sites/defau…..tables.pdf

              Look at discretionary spending throughout Clinton’s term (p. 5). The only actual cut occurred from 95-96 when outlays reduced from 544.9 to 532.7. All other years show monotonic increases, so I really would like to see the supposed spending cuts. Mandatory spending increased year over year for the entirety of Clinton’s term, so please details what these supposed cuts were.

              But of course factcheck and you fail to note that there are other trust funds and associated receipts. Wanna know something even better? Revenues in 1999 were $1.152T and outlays were $928B. So the CBO chart that you and factcheck are hanging your hats on is significantly incomplete in total trust fund collections and their impact on the perception of a ‘surplus.’ In fact that $1.9B surplus vanishes as a rounding error.

              http://www.gao.gov/assets/210/200562.pdf

              That’s not to mention the dot.bomb bubble and associated temporary income surge due to a gross misallocation of capital. The fact that the federal government harvested some of that sloshing money is really more of a crime than a badge of honor.

              Seriously, stay down, bitch, you’re only embarrassing yourself further.

          2. “The claims of surpluses result from adding the Social Security tax surplus into the federal revenue, which is improper since it’s actually debt (held by the SSTF), not revenue.”

            This^

            1. “But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. ”

              same link

        2. Here’s nominal federal spending by year.

          There doesn’t seem to have been much of a spending cut between 1993 and 1994, certainly not enough of a spending cut to cause federal surpluses in 1997.

          Don’t mind me though. I’m just posting actual numbers rather than making claims without citations.

          1. Did you miss the part where he told you you were way out of his league?

            I mean, seriously: he made an assertion so you should accept that assertion.

          2. Here is ultra conservative Heritage slobbering all over the 1993 Omnibus cuts:

            http://www.heritage.org/resear…..1990s-boom

            The large spending cut and tax increase passed in August 1993 had its greatest effects during 1994.[2] In particular, the Omnibus Budget and Reconciliation Act of 1993 sought major savings from Medicare and federal employee benefits,[3] which are good examples of the structural reforms I recommended in my testimony.

            GDP per capita grew only 1.3 percent from 1994 to 1995. That’s not bad, reflecting a private sector that rapidly picked up the slack as government’s growth slowed.

            From 1995 to 1998, fiscal consolidation was heavily on the spending side, and growth accelerated to a smoking 3.6 percent, and the deficit turned to a surplus.

            Just bow to the Big Dawg when you have a chance. And all he got was a BJ from a chubby girl.

            1. Palin’s Buttplug|3.5.15 @ 8:51PM|#
              “Here is ultra conservative Heritage”…

              Turd:
              Hey, look over there!
              Get lost.

        3. The budget surpluses of the late nineties were a direct result of the Omnibus of 1993 which not a single GOPer voted for.

          So Reagan wins the Cold War, which allows spending cuts, and then a GOP House gets elected in 1994, but all credit for the economic conditions of the late ’90s are Bill Clinton’s alone. Got it.

          1. Reagan’s administration also stabilized the economy, thus allowing for the next 20 years of relatively low unemployment, increasing labor force participation, and a growing economy. Reagan increased spending far more than I would like and deserves to be criticized for a number of blunders during his time in office, but the long term benefits of the Reagan administration clamping down on inflation really can’t be overstated.

            1. You can’t limit the fun to just Reagan. It’s not as if Tip(sy) O’neill had nothing to do with stonewalling any entitlement changes. But you can certainly fault Reagan with putting off and thereby worsening the PonziSS judgement day by agreeing to an increase in payroll taxes.

          2. Reagan did not “win” the Cold War. The USSR imploded under its own weight. It would have imploded just the same if Reagan had never been born.

            I was in USSR in its last days and I know.

            1. No, there was a concerted effort to force it to fail: Poland, arming Afghan rebels, the military buildup, the threat of SDI, talking the Saudis into dropping oil prices in order the hurt the USSR, and more. It would have fallen eventually, but Reagan gave it some big pushes.

    6. Umm, no. Bill Clinton entered the White House a garden variety leftist and eight years later walked out of it a centrist compromiser hated by the left.

      Hillary is responding to the 2014 drubbing by going hard left.

      1. Bill Clinton got his ass kicked at the ’94 midterms and never even attempted most of the left wing policies he really wanted to enact. He got his assault weapons ban in September of that year and that directly contributed to the losses the Dems took in 1994.

        There is no major left-wing initiative Clinton passed after 1994. I’d argue that the Republicans actually defeated Clinton rather than the other way around.

        1. “The era of Big Government is over”

        2. I hated Clinton at the time but he should be included in the dictionary with the word pragmatist. Got his ass kicked but actually worked with Congress to get shit done. Unlike Barrack “I won” Obama.

          1. Unlike Barrack “I won” Obama.

            And when he won he kept telling us “elections have consequences”. And then when the R’s swept the midterms last year, he immediately used executive orders to go against the voters’ wishes.

            I kept wondering why no one brought up “elections have consequences” as he was doing that, but the press still believes he is the Bringer of Light, I guess.

            1. And lots of Democrats (not just the low-info kind) seem to think the President is a sort of King, at least when he’s a Democrat. “Obama’s gonna pay my mortgage!” Congress consists merely of annoying and obstructive legislators, except when it’s run by Democrats. Then it’s the Voice of the People, and a crucial check on the dangerous and unconstitutional actions of a (Republican) President.

        3. I agree with your assessment of the effects of the Clinton’s drubbing by the Republicans in ’94. But, I think it’s a little unfair to suggest that he was particularly leftist by inclination. The guy had been the head of the Democratic Leadership Council. His baseline inclination seemed to be generally moderate opportunist.

    7. “he got his business done–a world-history-class economy that worked for almost everybody”

      Nope.

      Bill Clinton had nothing to do with improving the economy.

      The recession ended and the economic upturn began before he ever took office in his first term and the next downturn began before he left office in his second.

      He had no more to do with it than a rooster’s crowing makes the sun rise in the east each morning.

      1. The economy turned upwards because the internet emerged. Clinton helped it emerge. And BTW Al Gore WAS a key player in the development of the internet (which is all he ever said of himself–he never claimed to have “invented” it).. He was the one who kept DOD’s pre-internet projects (ARPA-net) funded, defended the funding of those projects from all encroachments.

        1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

          Peak derp can never be achieved

          1. Evidently not.

            Although toad boy is sure pushing the envelope.

        2. The internet did not “emerge” in 1992, for fuck’s sake.

          The “World Wide Web” was developed in 1989.

          Although Clinton did pass the telecommunications deregulation act, which was part of his “triangulation” strategy, by siding with Repulicans.

    8. technical-only scandals which no one cared about except the right-wing,

      Who among us *hasn’t* had sex with a subordinate in the workplace, then lied about it under oath.

      (Letterman said that at the time. Of course, it was a funnier before we learned that Letterman himself had been having sex with a subordinate (though not necessarily in the workplace, much less lying about it under oath).)

      1. technical-only scandals which no one cared about

        See, also, Rosemary Woods and the missing minutes on tape.

  17. Consider that this is probably the least heinous floater in the septic tank of Hillary’s life. Were she to actually get the nomination and run, innumerable hordes of closeted skeletons would spill into the sunlight. The woman is as corrupt as rotten meat, and vile even for a politician.

    It would be funny, but I wouldn’t be laughing if she actually won.

    1. I can agree with this. Now, if we could only get a metric as to how many of her emails were read by system administrators in Mumbai. Then it might become a real scandal.

      1. I wonder if Mr. Snowden knows more about this than he has said so far…?

  18. Call me when people start taking other questions more seriously, like why she was accepting donations from the governments of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…..ntributors

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cl…..ndraising/

    1. From that CBS link:

      “Should Secretary Clinton decide to run for office, we will continue to ensure the Foundation’s policies and practices regarding support from international partners are appropriate, just as we did when she served as Secretary of State.”

      Why is the Secretary of State accepting money from foreign governments?

      Has any Secretary of State ever accepted money from foreign governments before, or is this the first time?

      Has anyone asked Obama if he would pardon her if necessary?

      Does President Obama have any plans to investigate the Secretary of State for accepting money from foreign governments, and if not, why not?

      1. Has any Secretary of State ever accepted money from foreign governments before, or is this the first time?

        This is a question I’d like answered.

        If it’s unprecedented… mmm, more of that change you can believe in.

        1. How do you think they got all that money?

      2. Hil-Dog didn’t personally accept it, you moron. Don’t make me defend her.

        But if you don’t see the difference between a global charity and her own bank account then you are beyond stupid.

        1. I doubt she sees the difference.

        2. When the “global charity” is founded by Hildog and promoting Hildog’s agenda, there is not a real difference.

          1. I believe the foundation premises include a nice, out-of-the-way apartment that can be used by Bill when he’s in town and needs to get away from it all. *COUGH*

            Plus, let’s take a look at the history of such “charitable foundations.” More than few foundation heads have been caught with their hands in the till, one way or another. Look at the SPLC: they have overseas bank accounts and Morris Dees has a fabulous mansion.

            Taking donations for one’s charity can be a good thing, but it isn’t necessarily. And given the long history of Clinton corruption and shady dealings, it’s reasonable to have doubts about this one.

            1. Charities have turned into the modern-day equivalents of the Catholic Church in the 1600s. And Morris Dees and Hillary Clinton are like Cardinals.

              Someone needs to start a Franciscan movement.

        3. Palin’s Buttplug|3.5.15 @ 7:35PM|#
          “But if you don’t see the difference between a global charity and her own bank account then you are beyond stupid.”

          How do you spell “gullible” in lefty? T. U. R. D., that’s how.

          1. I guess some people think It isn’t a bribe if you pay it in public?

            The SEC would see right through those kickbacks if it were done by a publicly traded company.

            Yeah, we’ll pay the bribe money into a charitable foundation controlled by your husband and daughter–as well as you?

            Didn’t Seinfeld do an episode about that?

            The Human Fund! It’s money for people.

            1. I’m loving this argument, personally, given the number of charitable organizations that actually serve as slush funds for the people who run them.

            2. +1 Festivus Pole

          2. What is she going to do? It isn’t like Bill is still in office so they can’t rent out the Lincoln bedroom to Chinese capitalists can they?

        4. “Hil-Dog didn’t personally accept it, you moron. Don’t make me defend her.

          But if you don’t see the difference between a global charity and her own bank account then you are beyond stupid.”

          LOL sure, like you would have thought it was just dandy if GWB was getting millions from foreign governments into a Charity that he personally ran while he was in office.

          With Lefties, it’s always Principals Over Principles.

          1. Heck, I think they went after Newt Gingrich for a series of history lectures on tape that he sold (or narrated or something). That was certainly evidence of improper financial dealings while in office!!!

            And it occurs to me: maybe she and Bill thought they had a perfect set-up. They didn’t have to promise anything to oil sheiks, they just had to let it be known that this “charitable foundation” exists. Let the sheik think he’s paying a bribe! That’s how they do things in most of the world, as we know. So of course foreign bigwigs will “donate” for the “good cause” represented by the Secretary of State of the USA.

            And the benefits are many: The Clintons can play philanthropists. They can pay salaries to themselves, and to friends and cronies and allies. They can donate to friends and cronies and allies. They can travel in monied circles. They can get another location for trysts (not with each other, of course). Money, power, influence, convenience: what’s not to like? If Al Gore and Obama can get away with taking foreign money for elections, why can’t they have some, too?

          2. “into a Charity that he personally ran while he was in office.”

            The charity is also run by Hilary’s husband and daughter.

            How much is Chelsea getting paid by the Human Fund anyway?

            Is she drawing a salary?

            Hiring someone’s kid to work for you and paying them an exorbitant salary is a standard form of bribery. Paying money into their charity?

            Same difference.

            1. I’d love to know who all the people working for that foundation are. How many of them do you think are friends or allies of the Clinton family? How many favors do you think Hillary is buying by giving someone’s idiot nephew a comfy job with her foundation?

              1. And amusingly, the men at the foundation make a lot more than the women. War on Women!

            2. Ron Paul diverted presidential campaign donations to his family members by purporting to hire them as staff (and produce two of the most ineffective $20M campaigns ever).

              1. Do you have a link for that?

                Did Ron Paul collect those funds from foreign governments?

                Is Ron Paul the presumptive Democratic nominee for President?

        5. “Hil-Dog didn’t personally accept it, you moron.”

          Yeah, that’s what happened when money from the Chinese government somehow ended up in Bill Clinton’s election campaign fund.

          He didn’t personally accept it–but what difference did that make?

          I’ll say this: at least Bill Clinton had the decency to send the money back!

          Why isn’t Hillary doing the same thing?

          1. I can imagine all kinds of basic corruption possible with hidden emails.

            Such as Hillary selling green cards and getting paid in speaking fees.

            I base this on Terry McAuliffe’s “green car company” that didn’t actually make any cars, but it did sell green cards to Chinese “investors.”

            Where’d he get that idea from?

            His old boss.

            Hillary can hand out favors as sec state and ask bluntly for speaking gigs. So some Chinese guys get their kids green cards, and then Shanghai University magically offers a $200k speaking gig.

            Presto! All laundered and neat.

        6. Palin’s Buttplug:

          Hil-Dog didn’t personally accept it, you moron. Don’t make me defend her.

          You weren’t already?

          Democrats are so childish. They rant and rave with the consistency and voracity of a conspiracy theorist towards republicans, right up until the point when one of their own is caught with her skirt over her head, at which point, they suddenly go, “yeah, they all do it.” Like only now that their favorite gal pal is in trouble, does this behavior become perfectly acceptable and expected, really.

          Listen, I know why they all do it: they’re scum bags. That’s why they’re politicians. However, what excuse your ilk may have for childish selective outrage isn’t explained away by the almost totally consistent scumbaggery of the political class.

        7. Hil-Dog didn’t personally accept it, you moron. Don’t make me defend her.

          We don’t have to make you defend her. You love defending her. Otherwise, why would you do it.

          You’re right, though, having millions of dollars go into a Foundation that your family controls and takes money out of is completely different from taking the money yourself.

    2. “That’s where the money is!”

    3. The money issue is vastly worse than this email stuff. No idea why no one seems to care about that.

      1. They want some too?

        1. Everybody wants some. I want some too.

          1. No, no, no, no, no….don’t take ’em off…leave ’em on….

  19. And in Abe Lincoln news:

    “Actor/writer Wil Wheaton is the voice of Abraham Lincoln in Nintendo’s upcoming 3DS game, Code Name S.T.E.A.M….

    “In Code Name S.T.E.A.M., President Lincoln has created a secret organization to battle enemies from outer space. Agents of S.T.E.A.M. (Strike Team Eliminating the Alien Menace) include a unique mix of characters from American culture, such as Tiger Lily from Peter Pan, Cowardly Lion from The Wizard of Oz, and Tom Sawyer.”

    http://www.ign.com/articles/20…..name-steam

    1. …and in an ironic touch, Lincoln wants earth to *secede* from the Galactic federation.

      (source: a warm moist place)

    2. That’s a bit anachronistic. Acronyms didn’t come into use until the 20th century.

        1. Those are abbreviations, not acronyms. spqr and inri aren’t pronounceable, much less words.

          1. “SPQR is an acronym from a Latin phrase, Sen?tus Populusque R?m?nus ”

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPQR

            1. All that proves is that Wikipedia doesn’t know the meaning of the word “acronym.”

          2. This is trolling, right?

          3. spqr is totally pronounceable:

            Spocker: n. someone who defaces Canadian five dollar bills

        2. “That’s a bit anachronistic. Acronyms didn’t come into use until the 20th century.”

          I’m guessing you haven’t read much Roman history.

          1. Well to be fair, it’s always possible the writers used the acronyms and not the actual Romans, but some of the Histories date from before the 20th century. And it’s clear that Christian churches were using acronyms well before then.

      1. I am with Sagittarius to a point: Not that it matters much in an alternate history setting, but I don’t think that sort of acronym exist before the 20th century. By that I mean giving something a long name whose initials intentionally form a word. I don’t believe “SPQR” was a word, but “steam” is a word. And it was obviously created in reverse: starting with “steam” they worked out what it would stand for.

        The earliest, closest modern example I can think of is “Nabisco” (National Biscuit Company), which isn’t pure initials, and doesn’t form a pre-existing word. The same with “Comintern.” Later, we have NATO and scuba, but again, not pre-existing words. I’ll have to do more research….

        1. NATO and SCUBA are pronounced as if they were words. SPQR and INRI were not.

          1. But SCBA (the non-underwater version) is like SPQR.

    3. Abe Lincoln deserves better than to be voiced by a whiny bitch that ruined Star Trek until they were forced to dump him.

      1. Yeah!

        -Cathy Crosby

        1. I mean Denise Crosby.

          God dammit…now I look almost Crusher-esque in my level of stupidity.

          1. Why not Bill Cosby?

      2. “Kirrrrrk, help me.”

        I don’t blame Wheaton for the dumpster fire that was Wesley Crusher. I do however blame him for ruining board games by talking about himself all through them on his YT channel.

    4. He probably would have hired the Pinkertons

  20. Between, Hillary Clinton, Cristina Kirchner and Isabel Peron who is better?

    1. Hitler

      wait, was that not an option?

        1. She drank deeply from the Democratic cup of loyalty… perhaps… too deep.

    2. I don’t think Hillary has ever ordered a hit like the other two, although I could certainly be wrong about that.

      1. “I don’t think Hillary has ever ordered a hit like the other two..”

        Yeah, Hillary ordered Vince Foster be shot in the back of the head, rather than in the forehead.. or between the eyes..

        1. Ah, the “Clinton Body Count.” It brings back memories.

    3. Is this how Heaven’s Gate convinced their members to off themselves in a mass suicide?

  21. Now it also appears that she’s a hypocrite?and one who has plainly broken the law

    Who’s going to enforce it? Yeah, that’s what I thought.

    1. Justice league?

  22. SFW: 5 Ways to support ethical porn

    http://tinyurl.com/px3oqtb

    The ethical or fair trade label is used across industries from coffee to clothing to diamonds, but it’s often scoffed at in porn. The concept that something sexually appealing can be made ethically often faces criticism even within the industry, with slurs used to fetishize sexual minorities and those attracted to their bodies. I think what’s important about ethical porn is the ability to take something that is so important to our sense of ourselves ? our sexuality ? and think about it like any other aspect of our daily habits. If we buy organic free-range beef so that we know the cow wasn’t poorly treated, why shouldn’t we think about the concerns of the people who make our porn in the same way? It’s important we don’t leave an industry and its workers behind when we all consume what they make on a level that largely created the modern internet.

    Unlike mainstream porn, of which the majority is direct-to-DVD or posted to the company or performer’s website, a lot of ethical porn is as much about talking about the reasons behind the porn as it is as something to get off to.

    Sounds sexy, right?

    1. Also, there was this comment:

      Not sure if I’m comfortable with the beef analogy. But fair trade porn is definitely something I can get behind. And should be mandatory. Are there sex workers unions? The idea of screenings sounds amazing, is this a thing that happens across the sector? I don’t want to accidentally go along to something produced and put on by companies that disrespect/mistreat their artists. I will get googling.

      Should be mandatory? Like it would be illegal? Because nothing says ethical porn like being sent away to be anally raped for not consuming it.

      Also… Sex Worker Unions. Can you imagine the featherbedding? (NOT THAT KIND OF FEATHERBEDDING, PERVS!)

    2. Unlike mainstream porn, of which the majority is direct-to-DVD or posted to the company or performer’s website, a lot of ethical porn is as much about talking about the reasons behind the porn as it is as something to get off to.

      That’s what I want – pornography that is 90% dialogue.

      1. That’s what I want – pornography that is 90% dialogue.

        I didn’t know you were a woman.

      2. “Dialogue”? I think you mean “lecture.” With SJWs say “dialogue” they mean “talking with people I agree with.” Cis-hets like you get lectures.

    3. talking about the reasons behind the porn

      I would guess there are people who get off hearing the life-stories of porn actresses…like some of them would say how they were a sexually abused/raped runaway who now sucks cock on film for their next hit and stuff. Rule 34.

    4. By the way, there seems to be no bottom to the insanity of feminist websites. I think Everyday Feminism is my favorite, with such brilliant articles as What Happened When This Fat Woman Wore a Bikini.

      This year, I made a New Year’s resolution that confused some people. By “confuse,” I mean conversations about it usually went like this:

      Me: “Next summer, I’m going to wear a bikini.”

      Them: “What a great goal! What are you doing? Weight Watchers? Jenny Craig? Are you going vegan? Paleo? Are you having the surgery?”

      Me: “I said I was going to wear a bikini. I didn’t say I was going to lose weight.”

      You know, normally New Years resolutions require some sort of effort on your part. Saying ‘I am going to wear a bikini sometime’ is not a New Years resolution.

      The reason these people do not want to see a fat body in a bikini is because traditionally, that garment is something a woman earns by proving herself attractive enough to exist.

      If fat women begin wearing them without shame or fear, what’s next? Will they have self-esteem? Will they demand respect? Then what will keep them in their proper place? How would conventionally attractive people judge them?

      Indeed.

      1. Even funnier.

        You Call It Professionalism; I Call It Oppression in a Three-Piece Suit

        I like where this is going.

        Professionalism reinforces a lot of ugly “isms” and often intrudes in our lives silently and without any expectation of objection.

        For people like me, being asked to be more professional is sometimes a direct affront to who we are.

        What if I want to whip my dick out in a partner’s meeting, free from the unrighteous strictures of cis-gendered ‘professionalism?’ Who are you to tell me otherwise?

        That’s hierarchy in action. That’s not okay. Every single person in every single office should be taken seriously and treated with respect no matter what they’re wearing.

        Exactly. One time, I showed up to work in a mankini and a sombrero, and my corporate hierarchy fired me because they weren’t ready to accept the real me.

        Women, for example, are expected to be subservient and apologetic in the workplace, whereas men are rewarded for being pushy, ambitious, and outspoken.

        This is in no way my experience, but your wild assertions are duly noted, you oddly dressed hater of corporate hierarchies.

        1. “Women, for example, are expected to be subservient and apologetic in the workplace”

          I find this wait staff uniform constraining and oppressive! Fucking up your order of eggs and hash browns doesn’t merit an “I’m sorry”, patriarchal scum!

          1. Women, for example, are expected to be subservient and apologetic in the workplace

            So is everybody but the boss, you nitwit.

        2. If you hate the business dress codes so much, why work in an office?

          I’m recognizing more and more “problems” amounting to nothing more than a hissy fit over having to make “hard” choices.

        3. a lot of ugly “isms”

          That’s the current prog worldview in a nutshell, isn’t it? There are all these terrible “isms” that we all must recognize and hunt for and exterminate. They are tricky, these isms, and can disguise themselves and creep up on you when you’re not paying attention. And then they cause you to do rude and unjust and hateful and violent things. It’s how wars happen! If only we could all get together and make them extinct, all our lives would be better.

      2. How do all the guys who dig fat chicks in bikinis or whatever fit into their scenario? They’d probably be angry if you sincereley thought they were attractive.

  23. So is text embedding of links not allowed under the new regime?

    HOW WILL I RICKROLL PEOPLE NOW?!

  24. Fox News is going to have to do better than that. The link in its article isn’t to any “internal 2011 State Department cable,” but is instead to a portion of the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual. That portion doesn’t contain “Clinton’s electronic signature” or the words “avoid conducting official Department from your personal e-mail accounts.” Maybe this alleged 2011 cable exists somewhere, but right now it looks like Fox is making shit up.

    1. Gee, Seamus, I guess your grade in the remedial reading class wasn’t anything to be proud of, so let me help you out a bit. From the article:

      “While the cable told employees to secure personal/home email accounts given increased targeting of government employees, it makes clear that these personal accounts should never be used for government business and cites the departure procedures which prohibit the practices.

      The relevant section is from the Foreign Affairs Manual, 12, subsection 544.3.
      12 FAM 544.3”

      So you see, Seamus, the link was not to the cable, but to the relevant part of the manual which prohibited the activity.
      I guess YOU’LL have to do better; you’re welcome.

      1. So where is the cable? If Fox has it, why can’t they provide it? Dan Rather at least had the decency to let us see the fake National Guard memos.

        1. Seamus|3.5.15 @ 9:25PM|#
          “So where is the cable? If Fox has it, why can’t they provide it?”

          You’ll have to ask someone else. Maybe you’re right that they’re faking it; I have my doubts since they would be called on that in a NY minute by all sorts of people.
          For now, given the reps involved, I’ll go with ‘not fake’ and ‘slimy Clinton’.

          1. Well, they *should* have been called on it by all sorts of people by now, just like Rolling Stone *should* have immediately been called on all the holes in their story about the Phi Kappa Psi rape. Unfortunately, I seem to be the only one calling Fox, just as, for a couple of weeks, Richard Bradley was the only one calling Rolling Stone on their fabrications. But the longer Fox fails to provide the cable, the more suspicious I’m going to be about what they have to hide.

            (BTW, the fact that Clinton may be slimy does not exclude the possibility of the cable being fake.)

            1. Seamus|3.5.15 @ 9:48PM|#
              “Well, they *should* have been called on it by all sorts of people by now, just like Rolling Stone *should* have immediately been called on all the holes in their story about the Phi Kappa Psi rape.”

              What “holes”?

  25. Sagittarius sounds like someone familiar.

    1. Sniff…..
      T
      U
      L
      P
      A

      1. Yes, formerly who I am posting as now.

  26. A week after losing Spock, today we almost lost Han Solo

    Harrison Ford is now in stable condition after crashing his single-engine aircraft in Venice, Calif., on Thursday afternoon, according to People.

    The plane went down near the Santa Monica airport on the Penmar Golf Course. Ford was the only person on board. Santa Monica City Commissioner Phil Brock told People that he sustained a head injury and was treated by doctors on the scene and then was rushed to a nearby hospital.

    An eyewitness told People that Ford had engine failure during take-off from the Santa Monica Airport.

    Santa Monica local Yurika Harris lives a block away from the Penmar golf course and about two blocks from the end of the Santa Monica Airport’s runway. She happened to be looking out the window Thursday afternoon as Ford’s plane streaked by overhead and could immediately tell by its altitude that the pilot was in trouble. “It was flying along near the tops of the trees,” Harris said. “I thought, ‘That looks too low. That plane looks like it’s going to crash!'”

    Surveying the northern end of the golf course where the wreckage was being examined by Santa Monica police, her husband Ryan Harris added: “It was a masterful feat of airmanship. There are about eight trees nearby and he put it down without hitting any of them.”

    Never tell him the odds.

    1. “I thought you said you knew how to fly a plane!”

      “Fly? Yes. Land? No.”

      1. Really, you asshole? You inject a Temple Of Doom into a serious conversation?

        You deserve a Greedo for that.

        1. Aaaaaaand once again tonight I fuck up. Nevermind, I was thinking he said that in Temple before they bailed out in the raft with Kate Capshaw or whoever that dumbass chick was. I forgot he said it in Crusade when they bailed out from the zeppelin.

          I should get to sleep.

        2. The odds of successfully navigating a golf course landing are 3720 to 1. But did he make the Santa Monica Run in 10 parsecs?

          1. Grand Moff Serious Man|3.5.15 @ 10:12PM|#
            “The odds of successfully navigating a golf course landing are 3720 to 1”
            I’ll bet you just made that up, but it sounds nice!
            How about if he misses the bunkers and hits the green?

          2. “There’s no one on board, sir. According to the log, the crew abandoned ship right after takeoff. It must be a decoy, sir. Several of the escape pods have been jettisoned.”

            1. Why didn’t Vader walk onto the ship himself to pin down the Force source?

    2. “doctors on the scene”…at a golf course! Way to avoid stereotypes, folks!

      Thank God he didn’t crash at a doughnut shop.

      1. At that golf course, he’s more likely to get a nose job than cardiac resuscitation.

    3. Don’t worry! She’ll hold together!

      Hear me baby? Hold together.

  27. So Leonard Nimoy and now Harve Bennett….

    1. Thank God we’ve still got Lou Reed.

      Wait, we’ve still got Lou Reed, don’t we?

      1. Francisco Franco is still dead.

        1. Yeah, and Waylon. Thank God Elvis is still in fucking Kalamazoo.

  28. Hilarious.

    I was an escort for 8 years?and I hated it

    …Why’d you stick with it for eight years then?

    I thought that exploring, owning, and selling my identity and sexuality was an act of power. I remained convinced that what I was doing was an example of everything I was reading about women being their strongest, most powerful, and most actualized and that, through my example, I was helping women have a more equal foothold in the male-dominated world in which we live. Once the high of dissociation, success, and infamy wore off, however, I realized I was very wrong.

    You mean you didn’t end up liking a career that you only entered based on your bizarre obsession with gender equity? That’s shocking, since all the most rewarding careers are begun as a means of political affirmation.

    So, after several years, I was literally left with a hollow shell looking back at me in the mirror. I had not even learned much about my personal sexual likes and dislikes because, again, there is no room for self-expression in the transaction between a whore and her john. It is all about HIM and his sexual desires, kinks, and needs.

    No fucking shit. When you sell sex it’s the client’s sexual wants that need to be met? Who would have thought that a prostitute would have to serve the customer? No fucking way!

    1. To be fair, I felt the same way about working at Subway. To this day I can’t make a sandwich for myself without bursting into tears from the trauma.

      1. Worked at Subway? Was that before or after you worked as a court sanctioned drug counselor?

        1. During. The junkie supply was too inconsistent to be a primary source of income.

      2. I once worked at a Taco Bell Express but then it became a full blown Taco Bell and I couldn’t keep up with the menu.

    2. Market failure.

    3. I know it’s late and no one is going to see this, but this woman is pants-on-head retarded, and this story is hilarious. Johns don’t pay you to do what you want, they pay you to do what they want, obviously. Funniest part is it took her eight motherhumping years to figure this out.

  29. Been many many years since that came out and the sight of it hasn’t faded from memory. It still burns.

    Would that I had gouged my eyes out upon waking up that morning.

  30. Oh effing hell. That last comment was directed at the Hillary Spy cover link. Stupid squirrels.

  31. So Obama is thinking of raising taxes through executive order. Following in the footsteps of Bismarck and Charles I apparently. Once the President can dispense with Congress in passing laws and funding the government then dictatorship is inevitable.

    1. You got me riled up there for a second. He’s not talking about raising taxes, he’s talking about ending tax breaks previously enacted by the executive branch. That’s clearly within his authority, though of course it’s probably a bad idea for him to do it.

      I hate Obama as much as anyone, but crying wolf like that actually helps him by making us look like paranoid loonies.

      1. Insert banning 5.56 ammo and get re-riled.

        1. Another wolf-crying episode.

          Somehow I managed to put a few thousand rounds of 5.56mm through my AR-15 without ever encountering the subset that he banned.

          Was the ban stupid? Yes. Is it motivated by anti-gun animus? Probably. But it’s not “banning 5.56 mm ammo”.

          1. Your point has some merit

            a lot of the things obama is doing are explicitly aimed at creating very-public fights over issues he *wants people to be thinking about*

            So, he exec.actions on Immigration, so the GOP can remind everyone that they hate mexicans.

            he exec.actions on guns to remind people the GOP is the party of those ‘gun nuts’.

            same with corporate taxes, which despite being the highest in the developed world, no lefty thinks are nearly 1/3 what they should be….

            …keystone, which is to force the GOP to remind everyone they’re the party of Big Oil, etc.

            everything he’s doing is just intending to highlight the ‘wedge issues’ which reinforce the left’s view of the GOP as hopelessly irretrievable.

            I don’t personally think its very smart or going to be particularly effective – no one needs much reminding on these things, and his scorn for democratic processes does alienate independents…

            …if anything? I think the main purpose is to keep people from noticing how unbelievably horrible the ACA is going to fuck people in the ass when the employer mandate kicks … and to also prevent the GOP from presenting any coherent legislative agenda (*HA! like they’d do something like that)…keep them on their back feet, basically.

            Obama’s probably happier now that he doesn’t even have to pretend to be a national leader, and can just wage trench warfare with political enemies.

            1. If this is part of an Obama strategy I’d be fairly impressed by that.

              Nothing he’s done so far in this administration leads me to believe he’s that kind of smooth operator though. Certainly his handling of the Netanyahu speech screams bush league (NPI). It seems more likely that he’s just trying to secure his legacy with the left as much as he can, and the Republican base throwing self-destructive tantrums over trivialities is just a fortuitous side effect.

              Speaking of which… I attempted to listen to Mark Levin for a while. Mein gott. How can anyone listen to someone whine about Obamacare for three hours a day five days a week? It seems like all he does.

            2. everything he’s doing is just intending to highlight the ‘wedge issues’ which reinforce the left’s view of the GOP as hopelessly irretrievable.

              Or maybe Obama actually IS one of those leftists who views the GOP as hopelessly irretreivable.

      2. Charles I probably did some taxes where he had authority, too, but they were hated.

      3. I think of Obama as the union boss of public sector employees. He loves them and they love him back. He is very competent at representing them. No steel-worker gangster comes close. In his time, when the economy was collapsing under the weight of bogus home mortgages, he stimulated the buying power of public sector employees to solve the problem. Nancy Pelosi could explain the reasoning behind this better than me. But Obama is not into the explaining business, he’s a man of action. He is the most powerful president since FDR.

  32. I mean what destroyed royal power in Britain and in France was that the King needed the legislature to approve taxes to give him some money and the Long Parliament and Estates-General had other ideas.

  33. This won’t end.. well for the the Hildebeast. Team Blue can’t hide her ethics maybes and she looks like she has one foot in a grave. She looks worse than Reagan did when he was nearing 80.

    Lieawatha and O’malley will jump the shark and go against her highness.

    Seems like shades of Dukakis, as we all know that won’t end well for team blue.
    it might
    Team red will snatch defeat from jaws of victory. I despise the lot of them, but it could be interesting.

    1. They need another minority to hold Obama’s coalition together, since he has alienated the majority of whites. And I don’t see Hispanic males voting for an elderly rich entitled white woman.
      Blacks will continue to vote D, but may not turn out as heavily.

  34. what difference, at this point, does it make?

  35. Why did Blumenthal have US Classified documents? http://wp.me/p31sf8-1G5

  36. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.work-mill.com

  37. Already trademarking my bumper-sticker:

    Hillary 2016
    “What difference does it make!?”

    1. What difference would she make?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.