Latest emails connected to Clinton--concerning?

[Lamb]

Do you feel that the latest emails that show a connection to Clinton and the investigation of her past will be detrimental or nothing at all?

 

[psalms 91]

Nothing at all, wonder how much of this is real and how much is politics

 

[MoreCoffee]

Do you feel that the latest emails that show a connection to Clinton and the investigation of her past will be detrimental or nothing at all?

Right now it looks like nothing at all since the FBI chap didn't give any details and didn't say Hillary Clinton wrote any of them. I am presuming that there's more than one. That isn't specifically stated.

 

[Ruth]

I'll tell you I don't think much of it and I think the guy who sent the letter to congress may be in big trouble for trying to influence an election which is against the law of the DOJ. If I wasn't sick of the email stuff before I am more sick of it now.:flirt:

 

[Lamb]

Do you think he was saving his own hide? In case something that really matters IS found in the emails in the next few weeks?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Do you think he was saving his own hide? In case something that really matters IS found in the emails in the next few weeks?

Maybe. Presumably he has a motive but we are unlikely to discover it before voting day.

 

[Josiah]

Clinton for Prison - 2016

 

[Josiah]

Honesty - this (ALONE! God knows how many other lies, scandals exists - I've long ago lost count) this ALONE disqualifies her. It's certainly worse than Watergate - that drove a President out of office, it's worse that what her husband did which resulted in impeachment (albeit not out of office). Yet she should be ELECTED to the office? And..... I wonder...... if honesty prevailed...... could we have an impeachment and removal from office already in the works? She CAN be arrested, charged and tried while in office, she just can't be inprisioned while in office (she'd need to be removed first).

That on top of having been declared a "very bad security risk." I'm really curious.... if she is elected and is our president, CAN the "codes" and all the top secret stuff be given to her since she's officially a "very bad security risk?" IF not, is that a presidental crisis? Who gets all this if the President is such a bad security risk as to not be able to have this information? Does it go to the VP? Does the authority that goes with it also then go to the VP?

We've never had someone like this run for president before.... much less BE president.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Beware the leaven of the lawyers and republicans for they tie up burdens grievous to be born but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

Hypocritical political propaganda is older than the USA but it is present in the USA.

 

[whenpigsfly]

Politics is so dumb half the time, waste of time.

 

[Ruth]

Politics is so dumb half the time, waste of time.

Yes!

 

[Ruth]

Do you think he was saving his own hide? In case something that really matters IS found in the emails in the next few weeks?

I think he was being a real jerk of a republican unconsciously! Hillary was already let go from the so-called "crime". She apologized and I am so very sure she will NEVER do it again as she has been beaten to death about it already!!!

 

[tango]

Do you feel that the latest emails that show a connection to Clinton and the investigation of her past will be detrimental or nothing at all?

I wonder if it will actually make any difference.

There are certainly some people out there who believe she can do no wrong, and they'll probably regard this as just more Republican mud-slinging. Then there are the people who dislike Clinton but dislike Trump more and would still vote Clinton, whatever she had done, just to keep Trump out. Then there are those who dislike her enough (for whatever reason) that they wouldn't vote for her regardless of this latest issue with emails.

In any event I suspect there are some wavering voters who will change their voting intentions and a huge swathe of voters who won't pay any attention to it.

 

[tango]

Honesty - this (ALONE! God knows how many other lies, scandals exists - I've long ago lost count) this ALONE disqualifies her. It's certainly worse than Watergate - that drove a President out of office, it's worse that what her husband did which resulted in impeachment (albeit not out of office). Yet she should be ELECTED to the office? And..... I wonder...... if honesty prevailed...... could we have an impeachment and removal from office already in the works? She CAN be arrested, charged and tried while in office, she just can't be inprisioned while in office (she'd need to be removed first).

I think this is just another example of clever defenses going on. When Bill was president and the issue with Monica Lewinsky became public the shift to turn the defense into a question of whether a powerful man had - ahem, "that" - done to him by an intern was a PR masterstroke. At a stroke the discussion shifted into topics of "who cares" and "why is this my business" when the truth of the matter was far more than Lewinsky's activities under the desk - it was a question of whether the then President lied under oath. If he lied under oath it makes no difference whether the topic was the color of his wallpaper or issues of national security.

In the same way when Hillary says things like "at this point, what difference does it make?" the question isn't about what she should be doing from here, the question is whether she is trustworthy to be the commander-in-chief and given the highest office in the land. Even when the FBI director said she had been negligent with classified information that alone should disqualify her from receiving a security clearance (and would ordinarily result in her clearance being revoked) - whether or not she meant to be so careless isn't really the point. Whether or not foreign governments actually managed to gain access to them isn't the point. In that regard it can be loosely likened to the man who drinks a case of beer and then drives at 90mph past a school when the children are leaving - what matters is the reckless driving and whether or not he happens to run over any children is secondary. If by sheer good fortune he manages to pass by the school without running anyone over it doesn't justify what he did, it merely indicates he was lucky.

So as for "what difference does it make?", it makes a huge difference. The difference between considering former Secretary Clinton to be fit to be President Clinton or not is a pretty big difference if you ask me. And in many ways her protestations seem to be little more than "yes, I did all that stuff I shouldn't have done but let's forget about that and trust me with something bigger". Which reminds me of the parable of the talents and the notion that someone untrustworthy in small things can't be trusted with bigger things.