Hillary Clinton

What if Hillary Doesn't Care?

What if the real reason for Clinton's email secrecy was not personal convenience but fear of exposure of her true thoughts and unguarded behavior?

|

What if Hillary Clinton's emails were hacked by foreign agents when she was the secretary of state? What if persons claiming to have done so are boasting about their alleged feats on Internet websites and in chat rooms traditionally associated with illegal or undercover activities? What if this is the sore underbelly of an arrogant and lawless secretary of state who used her power to exempt herself from laws that govern executive branch employees and didn't care about national security?

What if the law required Clinton to swear under oath on her first day as secretary of state that she would comply with all laws governing the use of federal records? What if the principal governing law—the Federal Records Act of 1950—makes it clear that when you work for the feds all the records you receive and generate belong to the government and you cannot lawfully conceal them from the government?

What if she refused to sign such a promise because she knew she'd be violating that law?

What if the State Department has an inspector general whose job it is to assure the public and the attorney general that the secretary of state is complying with federal law? What if agents of the inspector general signed documents swearing that Clinton told them she agreed to abide by the law, and so they permitted her to have access to federal records? What if they did this because Clinton refused to sign an oath herself since she had no intention of complying with it, and because she ordered them to sign in her place?

What if the law required Clinton to swear an oath at the time she left office that she had no federal records in her possession or control? What if she signed that oath knowing that nearly all of her records were in her possession and not the government's? What if she refused to sign that oath because she knew she possessed federal records contrary to law? What if she blamed her failure to sign that oath on her own inspector general? What if the law requires the inspector general to report her refusal to sign this oath to the attorney general? What if that report was made and the attorney general looked the other way?

What if the president has known since 2009 that Clinton has concealed government records from the government? What if his assertion that "Hillary has given her emails back" to the State Department is a trick based on the slippery use of words? What if the emails of the secretary of state do not and never did belong to her, but rather to the federal government? What if her diversion of government records away from the government and onto her husband's computer server is a criminal act? What if Clinton is a lawyer who knows the law and knows when she is breaking it?

What if the whole premise of the law governing the records of federal employees is that the government owns and possesses all emails and documents used by the employee, and if the employee, upon leaving the government, wants any of her records, she must ask for them, and the government then reviews her records and decides which are personal?

What if Clinton turned that law on its head by keeping all of the government's records and having her own representatives review them? What if after that review she decided which records to return to the government and which ones to destroy? What if this amounted to the destruction of government property? What if we are not talking about destroying meaningless scraps of paper, but rather 33,000 emails over the course of four years in office?

What if Clinton seriously exposed classified secrets that could affect national security by discussing them on an email system owned by her husband and not secured by a mature Internet service provider or by the government? What if she did this because she didn't want anyone in the government or the public to see her records? What if the real reason for her theft of records was not personal convenience, as she has claimed, but fear of exposure of her true thoughts and unguarded behavior? What if she feared she could not publicly account for her concealed behavior, and so she kept it from the government?

What if when she claimed her husband's email server had never been hacked she didn't know what she was talking about? What if victims can't always tell when they've been hacked? What if the persons with whom she has been emailing have been hacked? What if one of her former aides—with the lurid nickname of the "prince of darkness" (real name: Sid Blumenthal)—was hacked? What if among the hacked emails of the Prince of Darkness were some to and from Clinton strategizing about the way to portray her role at the time of the assassination in Benghazi of the American ambassador to Libya?

What if all this lawlessness and secrecy was orchestrated by Clinton herself—a person devoid of a moral compass and disdainful of compliance with law and a habitual stranger to the truth? What if she is presently the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination for president? What if the Democrats don't care?

NEXT: Congratulations, and a fond farewell, to Will Baude

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. what if you stopped asking questions?

    1. You just asked a question.

      /smarty pants

      1. I make up to USD90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around USD40h to USD86h Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link
        Try it, you won t regret it!.

        http://www.jobs900.com

    2. Yea so I didn’t pay attention to who the author was until I read the fifth What if sentence…then I knew.

    3. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do,

      http://www.work-cash.com

    4. what if you stopped asking questions?

      Asking questions is the essence of thinking. To stop asking questions would be to stop thinking.

  2. Hillary Clinton would become president, that’s what.

    1. Hillary has shown herself to be unbelievably arrogant and sloppy. Given that, there is little doubt there were some very embarrassing things in those emails. If there were not, they would have been turned over. I would guess the chances of those servers being hacked for foreign intelligence to be well north of 50%. What this all means is, one or more foreign powers now has significant blackmail material against Hillary and will no doubt make use of whatever leverage that gives them should she become president.

      1. the fact that your comment – not to pick on you specifically – includes the caveat “should she become president” pretty much says very people are as upset as the Judge over this. Which screams volumes about the stupidity of the voters.

        1. Hillary could have been implicated in a Bernie Madoff level ponzi scheme and 40% of the voters would still vote for her because she is a Democrat. It is the other 60% that is the problem. I am with Pro on this. I don’t think she can win, though I do think she can win the nomination because the Democrats have no one else. The only chance I give her is if the media figures out a way to come up with a sham third party candidate to sucker stupid and disenchanted Republicans and independents not to vote for the GOP nominee. That is sadly more likely than you would think.

          1. Do you really think the GOP old guard are going to offer you a real candidate? I mean, REALLY? They know the voters won’t take Bush, so they are offering up a “new” face in Scott Walker. Think he’s not a RINO? Check out what he said in 2013 with ABC news.

            http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univ…..d=19567267

            Yeah, he fought the unions and won but…..what did he do with the money? Spent it on big gubmint. He’s a Bush without the name, or a Clinton without the name. Same ole crap. What shocks me is that no one even uses Google to get their own info. They just keep listening to the MSM and parroting what they hear….and nothing will change.

            1. Go troll somewhere else. Scott Walker would be a hundred times better than Hillary and certainly a better President than any we have had since Reagan. Is he perfect? No. But no one is. If the choice is Walker or Hillary, you would be an idiot not to vote for Walker.

              Thanks for concern trolling and showing a real life example of the strategy the media is likely going to use to try and drag her sorry ass into office.

              1. If you think Reagan was a good President, then you aren’t setting your sights very high. As for good Republic presidents one would be hard pressed to find a reasonably good Republican president since Teddy Roosevelt. That’s not to say that the Democrats can do any better, short of JFK, I can’t pick one that I would want to take over after this present administrative circus has played out. With history as it is, it seems pretty well evident that the United States doesn’t pick good presidents, or even good leaders above the local level, if at all. For what ever reason it seems there is a shortage of good leaders, or at the very least a shortage of good men and/or women willing to step into leadership roles within government.

                1. Sometimes life is like that. Just because you don’t like the options, doesn’t mean some are not preferable to others.

                  As for good Republic presidents one would be hard pressed to find a reasonably good Republican president since Teddy Roosevelt.

                  The fact that you don’t understand that Coolidge was a very good President shows you are nothing but a prog on here concern trolling. Even Rothbardites admit Coolidge was a good President.

                  You are just on here concern trolling for the cause.

                  1. Maybe it’s just me but TDR didn’t strike me as Republican given he was into progressive stuff too.

                  2. TDR was a fucking king pin Prog-lord. One of the Ur-Progs birthed from the same pits as the Uruk Hai. Prog of very Prog, begotten not made.

                    Fuck TDR. I wish I could go back in time so that I may shoot both TDR and WW.

                2. Reagan was not a good pres, but he was one of the least worst we’ve had in the last hundred years.

          2. The Stupid Party stands as ready as always to assist.

    2. I think she was toast before this, but now she’s burnt toast. Remember, elections are pretty closely run affairs these days, even when the media acts like a presidential candidate has won big. If she loses just a few percentage points due to this–and I suspect she’ll lose more than that–her chances of success will be very low.

      1. She is like Nixon without the intelligence and competence. The one doesn’t have an ounce of charm or political skill. Someone on here, I forget who, described her as the Lady Macbeth of American politics. Without her shrewish driving and dealing, Bill Clinton probably never goes past Arkansas AG and most certainly never comes back from his defeated re-election effort when he was governor. Bill just wanted a nice life where he could score chicks and feel important. Hillary is the one who drove him on and she forever comes off as a dislikable hatchet man as a result. Charmless hatchet men or women don’t get elected President.

      2. Evidently, she’s got a favorability rating north of 50% and is the only prospective candidate to be anywhere close to that. I find that…sad.

        1. She has a decent favorability rating among the general public but not likely voters – big difference. Also, the mass of “people” may like her conceptually but up close when people get a good look at her – hear her speak, watch her debate – she’s a friggin waddling disaster.

        2. she’s got a favorability rating north of 50%

          Perhaps it’s her wardrobe?

          1. Perhaps it’s her wardrobe?

            Who doesn’t love a nice pantsuit.

            1. Pantsuits for fat ugly lesbos are like honey to a bee.

        3. See, public government education is working!

        4. It is sad Timon, and a rather depressing indication of how a sizable number of our fellow citizens either lack ethics or are simply apathetic.

        5. What Lady B said. Also, favorability ratings are artificially high for identity candidates like Hillary and Obama. Obama has a high favorability rating. Yet, the guy is electoral poison to any candidate he endorses. That is because people loath him but won’t admit to it because no one wants to feel racist and not like a black President. So they tell the pollsters and anyone else what a good guy they think Obama is while voting against his party and interests. The same is going on with Hillary. The media effectively bullies people into not wanting to be seen as sexist and hating on a woman. So they give her a good favorability rating. That does not however mean they will vote for her.

          1. I hope to hell you guys are right (and that name recognition is really what a lot of that represents).

        6. Bear in mind, though, we’re roughly 1 1/2 years away fro the election. She has high approval ratings because she has a LOT of name recognition. Right now, this particular story is in the mindspace of 20%, maybe 35% of the population. Most people might know that there was some kind of dust-up about e-mails.

      3. in a sane world, she’s burnt toast. But we don’t live there. And Dems care more about winning than anything else. Who else do they have – even with Hillary’s limitations factored in – that could win a general election?*

        *some years ago, the same question could been asked with Obama in the ‘who else’ part.

        1. In a sane world, she’d never have held a national office of any kind, and, if she somehow had, she’d have been dismissed from office and prosecuted for committing multiple crimes.

          However, even in Fuckeduptopia, this unethical and criminal set of acts, coupled with the slime she was already coated in, will definitely move some voters away from her–far more than enough to make her a hopeless general candidate. Despite this totally bizarre conventional wisdom that the Democrats have no one else, I think even they (and their media friends) can smell enough blood in the water to start promoting some alternatives.

          I’ve long been dubious about her winning the nomination, simply because I figured the country would be insanely tired of her by primary time. I had no idea she’d help that process along so much.

          1. I think even they (and their media friends) can smell enough blood in the water to start promoting some alternatives.

            Shit, Ezra Klein’s desperate enough to promote Al Gore. Think about that: he’d rather have Al Gore run again.

            1. In that case, Team Red just needs to run the ManBearPig South Park 24/7.

  3. One of these days I’m going to be bored enough to respond to one of these with a comment providing an answer for each and every rhetorical question.

    1. Isn’t the answer to all of them, “that would suck”?

  4. What difference at this point does it make?

    1. I think you dropped these:

      ,,

      1. I think I transcribed her outburst accurately.

  5. It’s kind of bummer when writing style actively interferes with communication of ideas rather than complimenting them.

    1. or complementing them….

  6. What if the Lizard People were reading my email?

    1. What do you mean by “if”?

      *tightens foil hat*

    2. “What if the Lizard People were reading my email?”

      Semuanya sees all, Twenty Seven Bee stroke Six.

      Now, about that self-repairing air conditioning….

  7. Another fake scandal by wingnuts. Why?

    Mr. Obama signed legislation late last year requiring government officials who use personal email addresses for official business to bring those records into the government within 20 days. Before that, the National Archives and Records Administration simply required those messages at some point to be provided to the government.

    “The wiggle room for Mrs. Clinton is that those policies didn’t come into play until after she was gone” from the State Department in early 2013, said Thomas S. Blanton, the director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University, an independent, nongovernmental organization focused on transparency.

    NY Times

    Hil-Dog is a shitty candidate. But this fake scandal is more GOP lunacy.

    1. They finally gave the sock puppet talking points to spew. And they are even more idiotic than we thought they would be.

      1. And they are even more idiotic than we thought they would be.

        We will never reach Peak Derp.

      2. Pretty sure that–which isn’t news, by the way–was about people occasionally doing business on their gmail accounts, not evading security and records laws wholesale by setting up a server. I’ve actually pointed out the security problems with doing confidential business on personal accounts in the corporate setting, so that, too, isn’t a new thing.

        1. Exactly that. The only reason there is no law that says “you can’t set up your own server and not even use an official account” is not because it was ever okay. It is because it is so obviously not okay, no one ever thought it needed to be written that specifically into law.

          1. no one ever thought it needed to be written that specifically into law.

            *No* one?

        2. …and export-control, and ITAR, and EAR, and NOFORN, etc. etc. etc.

          PB apparently didn’t participate in any of the prior threads.

    2. Ok for the SoS, but not for this guy.

      State’s email policy gained some attention when the agency’s inspector general issued a scathing report on the tenure of retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration as U.S. ambassador to Kenya. The review, which led to his resignation three years ago, faulted him on a variety of grounds: one was having “a commercial Internet connection installed in his embassy office bathroom so he could work there on a laptop not connected to the Department email system.”

      in June 2011, the State Department sent a cable under Clinton’s name to all posts after Google reported that hackers believed to be in China were targeting e-mail accounts of prominent Americans.

      The cable, titled “Securing Personal E-mail Accounts,” told diplomats: “Avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts.”

      1. Yeah, every single person dismissed or prosecuted for the crimes she committed should sue if she isn’t dealt with in some manner.

  8. oh, and Good Morning Peanuts!

    1. Still but hurt about the dirty Jews not doing what they were told to do and re-electing Bibi?

      1. When Jeb and Bibi get us into a $2 trillion occupation of Iran you will be touching yourself in excitement.

        1. So, yes I guess you are. Those Dirty Jews hate Obama just as much as the racist Tea Baggers do.

        2. Bushpigs!!11! Christfags!!1!!! JOOOOOOOOOOS!!111!!!!!111!!!!

        3. Wait, what? Where the heck does Jeb Bush factor into anything? Holy crap, don’t you ever pause to consider what you write?

          That was almost like pulling in Chappaquiddick when talking about Hillary’s email. Not just a non-sequitur, but bizarrely so.

          1. If PB had a Wikipedia page, this would be its own topic.

        4. When Jeb and Bibi get us into a $2 trillion occupation of Iran you will be touching yourself in excitement.

          Hey, that 2 trillion will have the economy rocking. Multiplier, bitches!

    2. Bad morning to you Weigel. I hope a DuPont Circle bus runs you over.

      1. If it wasn’t so pathetic it would be funny. You never saw him on these threads before now. Now after two weeks or so, the journolist talking points are out and he crawls in to shit on every thread and try to defend Hillary. From now on he will be shitting on every Hillary thread rather than just the Obama ones. It is so pathetic and obvious. I guess that doesn’t really matter. The whole purpose is just to fuck up the thread and do anything to try and distract and stop bad things from being said against the cause.

        1. Basically, he’s doing his job.

  9. What if the real reason for her theft of records was not personal convenience, as she has claimed, but fear of exposure of her true thoughts and unguarded behavior?

    Well, I *was* following your essay until then, Judge, but that’s just crazy talk.

  10. King Dollar – the Black Swan.

    http://charliebilello.tumblr.c…..ing-dollar

    US Dollar is strong as death and will wreak havoc on markets.

    Watch and learn, Peanuts.

    1. Were you born a fat, slimy, scumbag puke piece o’ shit, or did you have to work on it?

      1. What difference…
        Oh, the hell with it.

    2. You are completely incoherent.

  11. What if the NSA had a copy of every email that used to be on that server?

  12. I don’t know if I’m going to be around for the Mourning Lynx thread, but:

    “Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday; I can’t be certain.” So begins Albert Camus’ novella [i]The Stranger[/i], and so begins the story of my own mother. The nursing home called Dad overnight to tell him Mom had suffered a heart attack, but we weren’t able to make it to the hospital in time. 🙁

    In many ways, Mom was well on the way to dying: she had had a series of TIAs (transient ischemic attacks, or mini-strokes), and was diagnosed with ALzheimer’s disease in the spring of 2008. I’ve been living with Dad to help take care of Mom for several years now, woefully underemployed, but that’s another story.

    Mom continued to suffer TIAs on an irregular basis, each one corresponding with a steeper bump in her slow decline to senile dementia. Mom wasn’t doing particularly well having been diagnosed six years earlier, but still well enough for Dad and I to take care of her, until a week or so before Thanksgiving, when she suffered another TIA. She took an alarming turn for the worse, asking questions like, “Are we home yet?” and “When are we going home?” This although we were in the same house she’d been living in for 40 years.

    1. Continued to get around the character limit:

      Mom’s temper was also getting increasingly violent. She’d always been ill-temmpered, but Mom was getting to the point where I began to go to night asking myself how I was going to keep my cool if I had to make the inevitable call to the 911 dispatcher to tell tham that Mom had tried to hit Dad over the head with her cane and Dad needed medical help. 🙁 Thankfully, that never happened. I also had to beg off of going going over to my sister’s for Thanksgiving with the rest of the family — not just Mom, Dad, and me, but also my other sister flying in from Dallas. Dad had the brilliant idea of spending two nights at my sister’s. We had all been there one night in June for my parents’ 50th wedding anniversary, and that was tough enough. Mom was ill-tenpered about the sofa bed not being comfortable enough, and I being in a strange bed got maybe two hours of sleep. I haven’t been getting enough sleep in my own bed dealing with Mom, and as awful as I felt for saying no to the rest of the family, being cooped up in a house with no opportunity to get out for 48 hours was too much.

      1. Part 3:

        And then the Friday before the Divisional Round game against Dallas, mom suffered one more TIA. I figured that this was finally going to be the TIA that sent her to a nursing home, but amazingly, the hospital discharged her the next morning, despite my sister (who had medical proxy if antying happening to Dad) insisting we couldn’t take care of Mom any longer. In some ways I didn’t care either way, but you try to get my mother into a nursing home. She had another of her screaming fits, and I finally blew my stack and said that if Mom did anything to made Dad have to go to hospital, it’s technically assault and battery, and it’s either a crime for which she’d go to jail, or for which she’d be declared non compos mentis. There was no way I could have taken care of her myself. Not that Mom understood any of this, of course; it just made her scream louder. Go ahead and tell me I’m evil, but I really didn’t give a shit. Hell, I was living in abject terror any time my dad had an early-morning doctor’s appointment and left me alone with her for an hour or two. If she heard him go out, she’d go to the door and bang on it, screaming that Dad was leaving her.

        1. This should be the final part:

          Anyhow, she went to the hospital for “tests”, and from there to the nursing home. Going to the nursing home was a thoroughly depressing experience. Never mind the people who were much further along the course of Alzheimer’s than Mom and were practically catatonic; Mom would get furious when the time came to leave since of course we weren’t taking her home with us. Going just before lunch turned out to be the best strategy: when the staff took all the patients to lunch, we could make our getaway.

          I hope none of you ever have to deal with a loved one with Alzheimer’s. Believe me, it’s hell. There’s a lot of details about the “joys” of dealing with someone suffering from senile dementia that I haven’t included, but the post is too long anyway.

          1. I’m so sorry, Ted. This sounds like a terribly difficult situation. Keep your head up.

          2. Man….I don’t know what to say other than you did more than most would/could….good on ya.

          3. Sorry for your loss, Ted.
            *pat on back*

          4. My sympathies Ted.

          5. Sir, you have my most sincere empathy and sympathy. I came off the road for two years to look after my grandpa when he developed dementia. I’ve been there and it sucks. Chin up.

          6. I add my condolences.

          7. There’s a lot of details about the “joys” of dealing with someone suffering from senile dementia that I haven’t included,

            guess I missed out on those joys with my mom, whose practical death pre-dated her actual physical passing by many months. What a sucky way to watch a loved one go. Ted, I really do what you have been facing. My sympathies.

          8. I’m so sorry, Ted.

          9. Sorry to hear about your loss Ted. My wife and I moved down here to take care of my grandmother and she had the same problems. What a terrible thing to watch a loved one go through. Keep your head up buddy.

          10. Ted,

            I am very sorry to read of your loss and the extremely difficult times prior to your mother’s death.

            Charles

          11. I’m really sorry to hear about that, Ted. My condolences for your Mom, for what it’s worth.

            And no, you’re not in the least evil The fact of the matter is that too often, the hospital is more than happy just to get rid of the person and lay the guilt trip on the family not really equipped to deal with the situation.

            I genuinely hope she’s in a better place. Or at least at peace.

          12. I’m sorry. Best wishes to you.

            My grandmother has Alzheimer’s. It’s tough visiting her.

          13. In theory, I’m a libertarian and therefore lack all empathy.

            In practice, I’m a human (contrary to progressive beliefs) and therefore offer nothing but my most unqualified condolences.

            1. For the pittance it’s worth, mine are added.

          14. Ted:

            You are a good son.

          15. Sorry for your loss, Ted. My own mother turned ninety this past year, and while she is still in relatively good health and mentally clear, I know that may not always be the case. I just hope I can be as good a son to her as you were to yours.

    2. I am very sorry for your loss Ted. All I can tell you is over time it will get better. It never gets better in one big moment. Moment of catharsis and healing or the stuff of movies. Real life doesn’t work like that. In real life, there never is that one big moment where you come to terms with loss. Instead, the pain of loss just fades away over time without ever going totally away.

      1. It’s sudden and still a shock, but in some ways, it could be worse. With Mom only having been in the nursing home two months, we were still going through all the rigmarole of dealing with the insurance and Medicaid. (LTCI should handle two months.) That’s all done with. And now Dad can put the house in a trust so that as long as he doesn’t have to go in a nursing home in the next five years (knock on wood) there won’t be any worries about losing stuff to Medicaid. Dad claims he tried to get Mom to sign off on that (I’m not so certain; I’ve always felt Dad kind of didn’t want to deal with all the details, although trying to get Mom to deal with anything even before she was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s was difficult) but she wouldn’t.

        1. You always want the person back but you don’t want them back sick. You want them back as they were and as you knew and loved them. I came to look at the loss of my mother as in some ways a blessing. As badly as I would have wanted her for even another day, I wanted her back healthy and as her self. To extent that I wanted her back sick and not herself, it was out of selfishness on my part not out of any concern for her. There are fates worse than death. And if death saves someone from a life of suffering and pain, it isn’t the worst thing but the better of the available options.

        2. Ditto what John said. There is no good outcome, but at least there’s an endpoint and relief for her and your dad- not to mention you.

          You sound like an absolutely terrific human being.

    3. What John said. These things are, um, messy but you will resolve them. Peace.

    4. You have my condolences. One of my grandmothers had that horrible disease. The strokes are bad, too, even on their own. My other grandmother had that.

    5. Sorry for your loss, Ted. And don’t feel guilty if in addition to your sadness you also had a sense of relief when she passed, it’s normal to have that feeling in situations like this. I know.

      1. “And don’t feel guilty if in addition to your sadness you also had a sense of relief when she passed, it’s normal to have that feeling in situations like this.”

        This, Ted, is something that I too want you to remain mindful of, and never forget.

  13. This was a thought out and elaborate scheme to ensure her emails were shielded from scrutiny. The question is why would she and her staff feel the need to do that. What makes it remarkable is her refusal to use any official email account. It is not like it would have been hard for her to keep two sets of books conducting clean official business on her .gov email and doing all of the crooked stuff on her Clinton Foundation one. Had she done that, this would never have been an issue. No one would have ever seen the Clinton Foundation one or had a reason to ask for them. Instead she does this and ensures everyone asks for the Clinton Foundation one. Why?

    The only thing I can figure is that she lacked the minimal discipline and self control necessary to carefully use the official email and she and or her staff knew it. They couldn’t let her have an official email account because they couldn’t trust her not to say something embarrassing or mention whatever illegal activity they were up to. So they kept her entirely on a personal account that allowed them to scrub everything before turning it over. That fact alone tells you she is unfit for even low office.

    1. Wow, that is Glenn Beck style CT.

      Occam says she was just a bumbling bureaucrat.

      1. You have to understand not everyone is illiterate like you. So to those of us who aren’t the words mean something. You should really take your meds and try to learn how to do it sometime. If nothing else, you might not fuck up cutting and pasting the talking points so much.

      2. Occam says she was just a bumbling bureaucrat.

        Occam says you don’t know Occam.

        1. Argh! It’s Thursday! Sorry!

      3. Occam says she was just a bumbling bureaucrat.

        Wow, let’s elect her president!

        1. READY. FOR. HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      4. Good grief. This is the best they have? Shreek fucking up the talking points says more than the Hildebeast’s email account.

        These people aren’t competent to be in charge of wrangling the dog turds in my back yard.

        1. Hilldawg for Prez: As long as you don’t mind stepping in shit all the time!

        2. Suthenboy|3.19.15 @ 8:31AM|#
          “Good grief. This is the best they have? Shreek fucking up the talking points says more than the Hildebeast’s email account.”

          So you reckon he’s not a natural and had to be poorly trained?

      5. Occam says she was just a bumbling bureaucrat.

        Everyone: remember this post for next year when dipshit’s on here everyday shitting up threads shilling for the “bumbling bureaucrat” for president, because “CHRISTFAGZ” or something.

      6. And if she’s a bumbling bureaucrat, we don’t want her as President.

    2. I think that’s right, and in addition to that they also didn’t want any official emails of State Dept business that would reveal Hillary’s incompetence and arrogance. Even if she kept to strictly business on the official email account she would have said something that would do damage to the presidential campaign.

      1. Hillary is just a bumbling bureaucrat?

        What an endorsement.

        1. She is just too old and couldn’t use two smart phones. I can’t believe her people actually thought that excuse was a good idea. Those emails must be horrible if they concluded that admitting that their candidate was old and out of touch was preferable to making them public.

          1. when you cannot admit to malevolence, you opt for incompetence. Never mind that it flies in the face of the smartest woman evah! narrative.

    3. I think her main fear is that one of the people she sent a shakedown email (or one where she promised quid pro quo for a donation to the Clinton Fund) would reply to it with her .gov address instead of to her personal one.

      Then she is really fucked because the govt email system now has a smoking gun archived and searchable. All because some jackass replied to the wrong address.

      To me this demonstrates that she knew well in advance that she was going to be sending incriminating emails. That is why she opted to go full paranoia mode.

      1. this demonstrates that she knew well in advance that she was going to be sending incriminating emails.

        Exactly. “Convenience”.

      2. That is a good point. I hadn’t thought of that. Think about how much open corruption and quid pro quo must have been going on for such an accident to have been such a concern they just eschewed using any official email. She must have just not done anything as DOS except run a patronage and favor operation for the Clinton Foundation. And the results of her tenure there bare that out.

    4. It is not like it would have been hard for her to keep two sets of books conducting clean official business on her .gov email and doing all of the crooked stuff on her Clinton Foundation one.

      Yes it would have been very difficult Nigh impossible, even. Because even if she’s careful about what she sends via the .gov email, she cannot control what others do. She would be banking on everyone she corresponds with being perfectly careful about what they put in writing and which address they send it to.

      Just one slip-up that points to something happening on the other email address would open the door to a subpoena for everything by her political enemies in the House.

  14. In 2016, one of our many Presidential candidates will win the office. At that time, that person will revolve 180 degrees from every campaign promise or position they’ve expressed, and rule the exact way ANY DemocratandRepublican would rule.

    Whether it’s Hillary or Jeb, is about the least important thing i can think of.
    Please don’t misunderstand me, I am not advocating a third party…. not at all. I am advocating a second party that might run candidates against the DemocratsandRepublicans.

    An actual third party will have to wait for that.

  15. Go try some great happy new year 2016 – http://www.iwhatsappstatus.com…..-2016.html

  16. “What if the real reason for her theft of records was not personal convenience, as she has claimed, but fear of exposure of her true thoughts and unguarded behavior?”

    What do you mean, “What if?”

    Hillary is the embodiment of the arrogant, entitled, leftwing political class. For her protecting herself from exposure of her true thoughts and unguarded behavior is pretty much the definition of personal convenience.

    1. I particularly liked the “habitual stranger to the truth” description.

      1. Well, they are certainly not well acquainted. May have met at a cocktail party once…

  17. I almost puked up breakfast when I noticed a new poll in today’s paper that purports to show 57% of Americans would be “proud” to have Hillary as president.

    If her e-mails were hacked by, say, Putin or Assam or King of Saudi Arabia, having advance info on U.S. policy or negotiating strategy would be a major advantage (like seeing your opponents cards in a game of poker.) Such hacking may never be revealed and, as John said above, could
    be held over President Clinton’s head to force other concessions that disadvantage the U.S.
    Yet 57% percent would be proud to have her in the White House? This country is screwed!

    1. Yet 57% percent would be proud to have her in the White House?

      Well, yeah. She’s a woman. Either you’d be proud to see her in the White House or you’re sexist. No other choices.

      1. Guess I’ll just have to be sexist then.

    2. And why do you assume that the poll is even remotely honest? Who did they ask? Does the poll even say?

  18. Socratic questioning

    Socratic questioning is disciplined questioning that can be used to pursue thought in many directions and for many purposes, including pissing people off.

  19. What if the judge knows that the series of rhetorical questions format is the most annoying type of column ever? What if he doesn’t care? What if he does this on purpose as a kind of trolling?

  20. What if andrew Neapolitano wrote an article on members of the legislative branch writing letters to a foreign government?

    1. The judge usually doesn’t write much about Ted Kennedy. Though his secret appeal to the Soviets for help defeating Reagan in the 1984 election is an interesting bit of history.

    2. american socialist|3.19.15 @ 10:56AM|#
      “What if andrew Neapolitano wrote an article”
      What if dipshit learned what ethics are an paid what he owes?

    3. What if american socialist came to terms with his support of a murderous ideology that destroys the human spirit?

    4. I’m guessing he’d say the First Amendment covers members of congress (and most certainly the senate) when it comes to foreign affairs, it doesn’t violate Logan, and since it was an open letter, that is really doesn’t amount to much.

      And are you so naive to think the the Iranians don’t know how the government of their most dangerous adversary works?

      1. Anyone who openly professes to being a socialist really is that naive and/ or stupid.

        “Look at me everyone! I support a murderous ideology that results in death and mass poverty everywhere it’s been tried because I’m a big fat fucking moron!”

        1. I’m from the United States and it’s the 21st century. Is there some mass extermination that is being carried out in the name of Lenin that I don’t know about? I pay attention to current affairs but I’m having trouble coming up with a Leftist that has killed anyone in the name of socialism over the last 40 years. I don’t have this problem with naming names of anti-government nut cases willing to do things like planting bombs underneath nursery schools because they didn’t like Janet Reno. There seem to be lots of those around lately. I say the Leftists and communists who we’re getting their asses kicked in the civil rights movement were more noble than right-wingers who like to blow up nurseries and gun down doctors who do things they don’t like, but then again maybe I’m just not aware of true perfidy of the NWO being planned by the Illuminati that work at the EPA and the IRS.

          1. Somebody call the fucking wambulance.

            Paid that mortgage yet scum bag?

          2. I like how you argue that the deaths due to socialism is a really unfair characterization, and then launch into a conspiracy theory-level rant.

            Pure awesome.

          3. american socialist|3.19.15 @ 3:17PM|#
            “I’m from the United States and it’s the 21st century.”
            And you’re stupid enough to pitch what failed in 1917 in St. Pete. What a fucking idiot.

          4. Hey Amsoc:

            Have their been mass exterminations in the name of Hitler in the past 40 years? No? So should we hitch our wagons to his teachings too/instead?

  21. Since, in Washington, the scandal isn’t what’s illegal, but what’s legal, then, really, how hard is it for these people to do business as usual and keep their nose clean? Especially, from what’s essentially technicalities of email usage?

    Janet Napolitano was smart enough never to use texts or email. There’s plenty of ways to communicate without generating records.

    The Clintons should never be in office because they’re too stupid. They take political opportunities, where they’re practically handed higher office, and they just embarrass themselves. Hell, people have been taking about Hilary Clinton for president since the 2000’s. But, she can’t keep her nose clean, in terms of following federal regulations for email storage, and coming across looking like someone who wants to keep secrets from the public.

    So, she’s taken an opportunity to be a slam-dunk shoe-in, and turned it into a maybe, as long as democrats don’t want to take a risk on the crazy indian lady behind door number 3.

    1. Please. Crazy pseudo-Native American woman. She isn’t an Indian, no matter hiw you define it, and she CERTAINLY isn’t a lady.

    2. “crazy indian lady behind door number 3…

      …Who opposed TARP, supports abortion rights, and has been a consistent opponent of corporate welfare.

      I’ve been here a while and I’d say the most consistent argument made by commenters like you is that to be a libertarian one must vote for whatever candidate the Republican church ladies nominate in order to stave off whomever the Democrats select. Is this an argument that people like you announce in public as being principled? Just curious.

      1. Warren would line up every libertarian poster on this board and have them shot if she got presidential power. She’s a fucking major lunatic.

      2. amsoc:
        “…Who opposed TARP, supports abortion rights, and has been a consistent opponent of corporate welfare…”

        and depends on class warfare populist rhetoric for any recognition. My interest in a politician is inversely proportional to how much they remind me of a Venezuelan leader.

        As far as your “people like you” argument:
        Since I’m a commenter here just like “you”, then, when you feel compelled to answer those questions despite any relevance to your own statements, then, so will I.

      3. american socialist|3.19.15 @ 3:07PM|#
        “crazy indian lady behind door number 3…
        “…Who opposed TARP, supports abortion rights, and has been a consistent opponent of corporate welfare.”

        “Represented Large Utility Seeking to Liquidate Rural Electric Cooperative”
        “Represented Dow Chemical at time it was fighting breast implant claims”
        “Represented Travelers Insurance In Asbestos Litigation”
        “Did Not Help Save Fairchild Aircraft Jobs”
        http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org…..porations/

        The fact is, I’d probably claim those were all positives, but lefty ignoramuses like you ought to break out in assholes and shit yourselves to death.

    3. Never write if you can speak; never speak if you can nod; never nod if you can wink.
      – Martin Lomasney, 19th Century politician

  22. “What if when she claimed her husband’s email server had never been hacked she didn’t know what she was talking about? What if victims can’t always tell when they’ve been hacked? What if the persons with whom she has been emailing have been hacked?”

    It is impossible to prove a negative; therefore one can never say with certainty that they have never been hacked. It is not possible from a logical perspective nor from a purely technical one.

  23. Re: “What if the real reason for Clinton’s email secrecy was not personal convenience but fear of exposure of her true thoughts and unguarded behavior?”

    Doesn’t matter. If she’s nominated, she’ll win because of

    “Why Barack Obama Won Twice” http://relevantmatters.wordpre…..won-twice/

  24. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!….

    ………………………………… http://www.NavJob.com

  25. What if?

    The reason the attorney general and the president of the United States don’t care to know about what’s in Hillary’s emails is because they already have access to them through the NSA and they don’t care either?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.