Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jack Skellington

Clinton email explanation not credible

815 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

DieChecker

I think they should subpoena that server right now, before it can have any accidents. Such as the IRS had. Supposedly she's not using that email address anymore, or the server, so why is she so desperate to hold onto it?

Supposedly she'd wiped the server, but unless an IT guy got in there and did a thorough overwrite job on it, the emails should be recoverable. And if there was a thorough IT job done on the server, then that looks suspicious too.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-emails-deleted-not-gone-116526.html

http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/28/hillary-clinton-confirms-email-server-wipe/

It seems to me that if she wiped the server clean, that she DID delete her work related emails. She just turned over printed out copies of those supposed emails.

They should feed all those emails into a system at the NSA and figure out from the To and From if there are any missing. Some that were in between email A and email C. That then would be clear proof of her lying about turning over ALL the emails.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

I think they should subpoena that server right now, before it can have any accidents. Such as the IRS had. Supposedly she's not using that email address anymore, or the server, so why is she so desperate to hold onto it?

Supposedly she'd wiped the server, but unless an IT guy got in there and did a thorough overwrite job on it, the emails should be recoverable. And if there was a thorough IT job done on the server, then that looks suspicious too.

http://www.politico....one-116526.html

http://www.engadget....il-server-wipe/

It seems to me that if she wiped the server clean, that she DID delete her work related emails. She just turned over printed out copies of those supposed emails.

They should feed all those emails into a system at the NSA and figure out from the To and From if there are any missing. Some that were in between email A and email C. That then would be clear proof of her lying about turning over ALL the emails.

It enrages me that the republican congress, with two massive wins, is afraid to make a move. The MSM will NEVER be fair so forget about them and do your job, there are enough people left that abhor this behavior to win every election if they man-up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

Can they somehow order all federal workers to turn over any emails they had with her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

It enrages me that the republican congress, with two massive wins, is afraid to make a move. The MSM will NEVER be fair so forget about them and do your job, there are enough people left that abhor this behavior to win every election if they man-up.

And for a woman who isn't even part of the government right now. Someone who hasn't even declared she is running for an office yet. Wimps!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Socio

http://freebeacon.co...-federal-court/

Hillary Clinton knowingly acted to circumvent the Freedom of Information Act by creating a private email server, according to legal experts.

Speaking at a panel hosted by government watchdog group Judicial Watch, experts in the field of government accountability agreed that Clinton’s decision to create her own email server was a deliberate attempt to avoid transparency laws.

Daniel Metcalfe, who was the founding director of the Justice Department’s office of information and privacy, said that the regime created by Clinton at the State Department was a “prescription for blatant circumvention of FOIA.”

***

Also on the panel was Joseph diGenova, a former former U.S. Attorney who said that the “incident has stopped the clock on accountability” and that “the basic facts cry out for a formal investigation by the Justice Department.”

Clinton is going to have to testify in a federal court,” said diGenova. “She has admitted that she has destroyed, theoretically, government documents under subpoena by the House of Representatives and under subpoena in civil litigation.

Could we be seeing Hillary getting fitted for an orange jumpsuit in the near future?

Edited by Socio
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

http://freebeacon.co...-federal-court/

[/font][/color][/font][/color]

Could we be seeing Hillary getting fitted for an orange jumpsuit in the near future?

But, see, she's a Presidential hopeful, so let's all just give her a Pass on this one. She won't do it again..... She's an old lady, give her a break...

NOPE! I don't understand people who think like that. If this had been Cheney people would be hanging him in effigy in the Congressional Floor. And I'd be right there with them looking for Justice, not listening to excuses and pleading that nothing wrongful happened.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack Skellington

This isn't going to go away....

As the Clinton Foundation money story unfolds in a most disgusting way, that email server holds the goods on all the bad deeds done in the name of Clinton.

trickle, trickle, drip, drip....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

This isn't going to go away....

As the Clinton Foundation money story unfolds in a most disgusting way, that email server holds the goods on all the bad deeds done in the name of Clinton.

trickle, trickle, drip, drip....

trickle, trickle, drip, drip.... and Bill Clinton in the same sentence? Are you alluding to something sir? :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blacknagus

But, see, she's a Presidential hopeful, so let's all just give her a Pass on this one. She won't do it again..... She's an old lady, give her a break...

NOPE! I don't understand people who think like that. If this had been Cheney people would be hanging him in effigy in the Congressional Floor. And I'd be right there with them looking for Justice, not listening to excuses and pleading that nothing wrongful happened.

Um...Cheney and Bush did do it. Once again., from the conservative side, you heard <crickets>.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey

Her goose is cooked, man. She's in check right now and there are very options left for her to avoid a checkmate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Um...Cheney and Bush did do it. Once again., from the conservative side, you heard <crickets>.

Once again you make a statement with zero proof. I'll ask once again, are you an SEIU member?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Um...Cheney and Bush did do it. Once again., from the conservative side, you heard <crickets>.

OH, I'm sorry, if Bush killed a billion people, then it would be OK for Hillary to kill 1.5 billion, right?? If some previous President commited a crime, we certainly shouldn't prosecute anyone for that crime in the future, that would be unfair.....

When kids point at each other and say, "He started it." That doesn't fly with me either. Both should be punished.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sundew

Clinton not credible. There fixed it for you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack Skellington

Hillary..... Who is she?

https://youtu.be/1mYW5nmS9ps

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Let's face facts, Hillary is a terrible candidate because she sucks at it. She isn't likable, isn't believable and isn't a good speaker. Women will vote for a woman just because she is a woman but a lot of women just plain don't like Hillary so won't show up regardless of her gender. I think she is one of the few women candidates available that won't excite the female vote! How bizarre.

I can't believe the DNC is happy about this candidacy. Hard core leftists will vote for Satan if you ran him but they are a small minority and while vocal, don't represent the constituencies that the dems need to energize. The MSM will dutifully trumpet for her cause but even they (MSNBC excepted) seem to be holding their noses while once again demeaning themselves. This is great fun to watch, especially the staged, sterile appearances she makes. Hilarious stuff.

Hopefully the multibillion dollar Clinton machine will blow away any dem candidate that dares sticks their heads up over the parapet to challenge her and so beats them up that they are irrevocably scarred before the real show starts. People think she'll bail out before too long because of all the scandals but I know this creature and it isn't going to happen. Clintons don't care about scandals because their constituency doesn't care how dishonest their candidate is. Plus she needs to stay in because she has collected millions upon millions of dollars from people who are depending on her corrupt presidency to get their deals done. They'll be wanting that money back and rules be damned if she backs out now.

Edited by Merc14
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

Hopefully the multibillion dollar Clinton machine will blow away any dem candidate that dares sticks their heads up over the parapet to challenge her and so beats them up that they are irrevocably scarred before the real show starts.

I believe that's wishful thinking.

I don't know who will get the Democratic nomination, but I'm predicting it won't be Hillary.

I made the same prediction a year before Obama beat her in the primaries last time. So I'm thinking I'll stick with a winner here.

Harte

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

I believe that's wishful thinking.

I don't know who will get the Democratic nomination, but I'm predicting it won't be Hillary.

I made the same prediction a year before Obama beat her in the primaries last time. So I'm thinking I'll stick with a winner here.

Harte

I agree, I don't thinks she survives the primaries but she will go down fighting and has plenty of money to make it really ugly. What a quandary to have your donor base so heavily invested, so early, in such a fundamentally flawed candidate. My point is that the myriad scandals surrounding her won't sink the ship (let's face it, dems don't care about the honesty of their candidates) her putrid skills at running for office will torpedo her run for the WH. What's funny is no one dare tell her she sucks at being a candidate, even Bill. :w00t:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

OH, I'm sorry, if Bush killed a billion people, then it would be OK for Hillary to kill 1.5 billion, right?? If some previous President commited a crime, we certainly shouldn't prosecute anyone for that crime in the future, that would be unfair.....

When kids point at each other and say, "He started it." That doesn't fly with me either. Both should be punished.

It's no accident you're comparing politicians with children.

Nobody was punished; woulda shoulda and yada yada.

And I don't ever remember you flying with me when I was flying with filing charges against Bush administration officials or impeaching Obama administration officials for war crimes. I have found that the fastest way to create a cricket farm is to talk to Republicans about impeaching Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack Skellington

Obama is on his way out the door-- thank GOD and the Constitution. No one on the Republican side has any appetite for impeachment because it is a useless activity as proven by the last time it was done. Where is Bill Clinton? Did impeaching him change anything at all? There are people who want to put him right back in the White House. Good Grief!

Hillary most definitely is unlikable, but that doesn't make her unelectable. So many people are constrained by ideology that it just doesn't matter that she stinketh. It doesn't matter to many if Bill was impeached, a pedophile, a liar, or a crook. It won't matter to them what Hillary does or says-- and that's just a fact.

-- I had almost forgotten about Sandy Berger (aka Ham Burglar) who stuffed documents in his socks and later destroyed those documents on the Clinton's behalf. He was a Clinton-server before the days where the convenience of having your own server permitted the destruction of evidence with a keystroke. Dox in sox--- criminal genius.

It worked then. Works now-- if your name is Clinton.

Isn't anyone else nauseous at the idea of extending the 20 years we've had already of a Clinton or a Bush in the Whitehouse?

The thought of another day makes me throw up in my mouth. I reserve my sickest sickness for the thought of another Obama, however. Why do these people think they are entitled to dynasties? Did it start with the Kennedy years?

This is AMERICA-- we have no royal families.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Obama is on his way out the door-- thank GOD and the Constitution. No one on the Republican side has any appetite for impeachment because it is a useless activity as proven by the last time it was done. Where is Bill Clinton? Did impeaching him change anything at all? There are people who want to put him right back in the White House. Good Grief!

Hillary most definitely is unlikable, but that doesn't make her unelectable. So many people are constrained by ideology that it just doesn't matter that she stinketh. It doesn't matter to many if Bill was impeached, a pedophile, a liar, or a crook. It won't matter to them what Hillary does or says-- and that's just a fact.

-- I had almost forgotten about Sandy Berger (aka Ham Burglar) who stuffed documents in his socks and later destroyed those documents on the Clinton's behalf. He was a Clinton-server before the days where the convenience of having your own server permitted the destruction of evidence with a keystroke. Dox in sox--- criminal genius.

It worked then. Works now-- if your name is Clinton.

Isn't anyone else nauseous at the idea of extending the 20 years we've had already of a Clinton or a Bush in the Whitehouse?

The thought of another day makes me throw up in my mouth. I reserve my sickest sickness for the thought of another Obama, however. Why do these people think they are entitled to dynasties? Did it start with the Kennedy years?

This is AMERICA-- we have no royal families.

Oh, I agree that any democrat will get a certain percentage of the votes regardless of who they are or what villainy they have done but they still have to get all those not-so-committeds off their couches and into the booths like Obama could. She will energize a certain number of women who don't care what she has done, they only care she is a woman but that won't be the grand slam Obama had. I also agree another Bush or Clintons a sickening thought especially when we have a new generation of folks with brains and proven records to vote for.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

It's no accident you're comparing politicians with children.

Nobody was punished; woulda shoulda and yada yada.

And I don't ever remember you flying with me when I was flying with filing charges against Bush administration officials or impeaching Obama administration officials for war crimes. I have found that the fastest way to create a cricket farm is to talk to Republicans about impeaching Obama.

Impeach Obama? Why? We'd just get Biden in charge. And I agree with Jack Skellington that impeachment didn't do anything to stop Bill Clinton.

As to charges against Bush. Why didn't the completely Democrat Congress bring charges in 2009? I think it is because they knew they'd never make it stick. If you're talking the Iraq War 2, then Bush had Deniability about everything. The CIA took the hit on that one. If we're talking Afghanistan, then you'd also have to charge 99% of those who were sitting in Congress who voted for military action also.

Just isn't worth the fight. But, if you can pin a decision taken unilaterally by the President. Then you may be able to get some real charges figured out. To the best of my knowledge Bush hasn't had that kind of evidence pinned on him.

Obama is on his way out the door-- thank GOD and the Constitution. No one on the Republican side has any appetite for impeachment because it is a useless activity as proven by the last time it was done. Where is Bill Clinton? Did impeaching him change anything at all? There are people who want to put him right back in the White House. Good Grief!

Hillary most definitely is unlikable, but that doesn't make her unelectable. So many people are constrained by ideology that it just doesn't matter that she stinketh. It doesn't matter to many if Bill was impeached, a pedophile, a liar, or a crook. It won't matter to them what Hillary does or says-- and that's just a fact.

I think she's electable, but only because people are stupid. There are other women running if a needs to be a woman. And there are other liberals running if it needs to be a liberal. But, what the nation doesn't need is a sneaky, lying do-nothing that simply wants power for powers sake, and will spend trillions of dollars and get nothing done.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

You may be a good fit, and if you are an agnostic or apatheist; truly, you would find people of similar mind. One of the "requirements" are that you believe in a higher power, but that can be applied to atheism as well, its not exclusive to religion or belief systems.

I thought the actual definition of an atheist is someone who does Not Believe in a higher power, other then those demonstrated by science, such as Evolution and the Weather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Impeach Obama? Why? We'd just get Biden in charge. And I agree with Jack Skellington that impeachment didn't do anything to stop Bill Clinton.

As to charges against Bush. Why didn't the completely Democrat Congress bring charges in 2009? I think it is because they knew they'd never make it stick. If you're talking the Iraq War 2, then Bush had Deniability about everything. The CIA took the hit on that one. If we're talking Afghanistan, then you'd also have to charge 99% of those who were sitting in Congress who voted for military action also.

Just isn't worth the fight. But, if you can pin a decision taken unilaterally by the President. Then you may be able to get some real charges figured out. To the best of my knowledge Bush hasn't had that kind of evidence pinned on him.

Democrats were only anti-war until January 2009, until the guy they'd rather have a beer with was behind the curtain. Benedict Arnolds, the lot of them.

The CIA did take the hit but as we now know in hindsight, dishonestly so. They were an instrument of the Bush administration used to get the war on. And the fall guy to cover their rears. "Bad intelligence" was one of many consummated lies. Like the military, I think the CIA has an important job to do, but is misused by politicians and bureaucrats just the same.

You can't be impeached if the Senate acquits you. Since impeachment is beyond the political capability of our lawmakers, bringing it up is more a jab at what they're incapable of doing. But I can't agree with some hypothetical or theoretical statement that impeachment is impotent. Impeachment is very powerful. It throws the President out. With as many complaints some people make about Obama, one would have thought they'd have scraped their majorities together and done something meaningful about it. Republicans couldn't care one iota about what Obama did in Libya. Grossly incompetent nimwits, the lot of them.

Willy Jeff didn't get anymore BJ's in the Oral Office that we know of after his impeachment hearings, so maybe future Presidents (Biden et al) won't take the country to war on a pack of lies, or make hurr durrrr missile attacks against whoever that ignore both Article 1 of the US Constitution and the War Powers Resolution past the legal deadline. If only that was as important a reason to impeach a homey as perjury over one's personal sex life.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Democrats were only anti-war until January 2009, until the guy they'd rather have a beer with was behind the curtain. Benedict Arnolds, the lot of them.

:w00t:

Obama wasn't elected for his Foreign Affairs abilities, or his ability with the Military. He was elected to "fix the economy", which he tried, and failed (in my opinion). Even most Democrats admitted that McCain would have made a much better Foreign Affairs and Militarily Concerned President.

The CIA did take the hit but as we now know in hindsight, dishonestly so. They were an instrument of the Bush administration used to get the war on. And the fall guy to cover their rears. "Bad intelligence" was one of many consummated lies. Like the military, I think the CIA has an important job to do, but is misused by politicians and bureaucrats just the same.

Isn't it actually just highly suspected that Bush manipulated the CIA and demanded bad data? From what I've read the CIA was definitely being pressured to provide data that could lead into the war, but I don't think anyone forced them to make that report of WMD. CIA basically decided to give Bush what he wanted. Therefore it was CIAs fault.

You can't be impeached if the Senate acquits you. Since impeachment is beyond the political capability of our lawmakers, bringing it up is more a jab at what they're incapable of doing. But I can't agree with some hypothetical or theoretical statement that impeachment is impotent. Impeachment is very powerful. It throws the President out. With as many complaints some people make about Obama, one would have thought they'd have scraped their majorities together and done something meaningful about it. Republicans couldn't care one iota about what Obama did in Libya. Grossly incompetent nimwits, the lot of them.

Impeachment has never been successful at the Presidential level, so its a punishment that has never been used, and so is likely a joke as a deterrent to criminal activity. Clinton got every single Dem Senator to vote Not Guilty, even when many of them reported on the record that what he did was wrong. That is partisanship, which is actually the biggest problem the US FedGov has. If the government didn't have to fight partisanship on every single issue, we'd get a lot more done. If only Congressman could THINK and vote their conscience, instead of having to vote the party line, or face the wrath of their Party.

Willy Jeff didn't get anymore BJ's in the Oral Office that we know of after his impeachment hearings, so maybe future Presidents (Biden et al) won't take the country to war on a pack of lies, or make hurr durrrr missile attacks against whoever that ignore both Article 1 of the US Constitution and the War Powers Resolution past the legal deadline. If only that was as important a reason to impeach a homey as perjury over one's personal sex life.

I'm sure the BJs didn't end just because Billy got caught. Hell he's even run off to the Caribbean with that child rapist Epstein.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bama13

You can't be impeached if the Senate acquits you.

Yes you can. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice by the House. He was acquitted by the Senate, but that doesn't change the fact that he was impeached. An impeachment is like a indictment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.