Hillary Clinton Thread

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t think it’s fair to say Hillary exposed state secrets to the world. She sent them over a server that was not a government server. And, it was the government server that was hacked, not Hillary’s and Bill’s, so in a strange sort of way, Hillary unwittingly protected state secrets.

Other government employees were using unsecured servers as well. They just aren’t running for president.

Hillary has admitted that even though others were doing it, it wasn’t the best decision, and even though I like her, I’d have to say, that wasn’t the best decision. It might have been convenient, but it wasn’t the best thing to do. That happens a lot of the time, though when “everyone is doing it.” Or nearly everyone.

And how do we know her server(s) weren’t hacked? The answer is, we don’t. But I think we can reasonably believe that if China bothers to hack ordinary business entities in the U.S., it had her hacked as well.

If, indeed, “other government employees” were using unsecured servers shipping top secret (and above) information back and forth, then they should be investigated for criminal acts as well.

I think everybody knows by now that it wasn’t a matter of “convenience” for her. It was a way to avoid having to respond to FOIA requests, or so she believed.

 

[grotto]

martensjr:

Refuse to admit the truth. That is the pro-choice bottom line no matter how low it has to go!

 

[Jeanne_S]

martensjr:

Refuse to admit the truth. That is the pro-choice bottom line no matter how low it has to go!

For them the truth is malleable

 

[Theo520]

PP now has a cheerleader in both parties (thanks to ____), so the “war on women” really can’t be a Dem narrative anymore.

Trump’s approach may have ‘defanged’ PP from attacking him, but they are still 100% behind the Dem party.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

---

You are entitled to your opinion about Hillary Clinton’s private server and that it was not hacked, and your attempt to reward her strange way of protecting the classified info. However, your statement demands to be declared an opinion of fantasy not facts. It does come to be a surprise though that you would profess that you “like her”.

After reviewing many of your former posts, it appears you have changed your mind about several matters. “I am not a democrat” / “I am a democrat” - “I do not support her” and obviously, repeatedly, you do.

You imply that you personally are against abortion but cannot declare that you are against it; enough to not finance the evil with federal funds, or think revocation of the Supreme Court decision of Roe v Wade should happen.

Maybe its just misunderstanding on my part and would be encouraged to hear from such as yourself, highly educated etc., that you condemn abortion and those who provide and profit from it. That would have to include the Democrat Party and Chairwoman who
epitomizes the champion of Planned Parenthood.

I’m actually an Independent. At the time I said I wasn’t a Clinton supporter, I was a Sanders supporter. I’m still a Sanders supporter, but I’m realistic enough to know Clinton will get the nomination, and I will support her and vote for her.

I would not have an abortion myself, I believe a fetus is a human being at conception. However, I also support religious freedom, so I do not believe Roe v Wade should be overturned since some religions do not believe a six week old, an eight week old fetus is a human person since it is not viable outside the womb.

If we lived in a theocracy, I would believe abortion should be declared illegal, but we live in a country where there is separation of church and state. In addition, many Catholic women have abortions. I think legalized abortion is here to stay. I believe the place to stop it is at home and at church, by teaching children the sanctity of life. Abortion was legal when I was born, but I would never consider having one because I have been taught the sanctity of all life since I’ve been a toddler. People in my family don’t even kill a spider. They just put it back outside.

 

[Jeanne_S]

I agree that educating on the dignity of all life,beginnings with life in the womb is a big piece of turning the tide away from the death culture as a whole.Another good reinforcement of that would be access to ultrasounds in all pregnancy centers,PP included.However they resist idea.So ,for me they are really about the culture of death in the womb,not giving each woman a true well informed choice.It has been shown that women who see ultra sounds of their babies are much much less likely to abort.ThatvPP rejects this aspect of “choice” speaks volumes. ThatvHillarybClinton unabashedly supports them,speaks volumes as well

 

[YADA]

…However, I also support religious freedom, so I do not believe Roe v Wade should be overturned since some religions do not believe a six week old, an eight week old fetus is a human person since it is not viable outside the womb.
…

The fact that a distinct living human being exists from the moment of conception is a matter of biology - not theology … it is a simply scientific fact regardless of what ones religion may believe or think …

Some peoples religion believes women are property of men - does your religious freedom mean that we should allow women to he owned as chattel because you would not want your view against that imposed upon them?

Some religions practice human sacrifice - should we not pass laws that would infringe on those practices?

I think you are only for certain ‘freedom’ of religion practices …

 

[Path_Finder]

---

You are entitled to your opinion about Hillary Clinton’s private server and that it was not hacked, and your attempt to reward her strange way of protecting the classified info. However, your statement demands to be declared an opinion of fantasy not facts. It does come to be a surprise though that you would profess that you “like her”.

After reviewing many of your former posts, it appears you have changed your mind about several matters. “I am not a democrat” / “I am a democrat” - “I do not support her” and obviously, repeatedly, you do.

You imply that you personally are against abortion but cannot declare that you are against it; enough to not finance the evil with federal funds, or think revocation of the Supreme Court decision of Roe v Wade should happen.

Maybe its just misunderstanding on my part and would be encouraged to hear from such as yourself, highly educated etc., that you condemn abortion and those who provide and profit from it. That would have to include the Democrat Party and Chairwoman who
epitomizes the champion of Planned Parenthood.

Some engage in class warfare; they would not give one party a chance no matter what, following party line is more important than religion. Beware of disingenuous arguments.

 

[YADA]

I agree that educating on the dignity of all life,beginnings with life in the womb is a big piece of turning the tide away from the death culture as a whole.Another good reinforcement of that would be access to ultrasounds in all pregnancy centers,PP included.However they resist idea.So ,for me they are really about the culture of death in the womb,not giving each woman a true well informed choice.It has been shown that women who see ultra sounds of their babies are much much less likely to abort.ThatvPP rejects this aspect of “choice” speaks volumes. ThatvHillarybClinton unabashedly supports them,speaks volumes as well

And requiring that women see the ultrasound before an abortion is opposed by Hillary Clinton and all the pro-abortion proponents …

In the area of medical procedures and medical care - more information is seen as the highest and best scenario and that all people should have access to it - except in the abortion mills … then having a fully informed patient is not the best - in fact its to be opposed at all costs …

and having a planned parenthood clinic meet all the requirements of any other medical clinic … nope - totally necessary

 

[Adonia]

I just saw this thread and thought it would be popular and with 32 lines I see I was right.

Her candidacy and the fact that people actually support her shows how far our country has fallen. The fact that she was a failure as Secretary of State alone disqualifies her, but then there is her shady past and that she is now under a criminal investigation for her e-mails is further proof that she is unqualified to be the President. God help us if she is ever elected.

 

[Path_Finder]

I just saw this thread and thought it would be popular and with 32 lines I see I was right.

Her candidacy and the fact that people actually support her shows how far our country has fallen. The fact that she was a failure as Secretary of State alone disqualifies her, but then there is her shady past and that she is now under a criminal investigation for her e-mails is further proof that she is unqualified to be the President. God help us if she is ever elected.

Yes, I think reading the stories, the FBI does wish to indict her.

 

[meltzerboy]

Imo this is a fantasy, based on a LOT of wishful thinking.

It is happening before our eyes rather than a matter of wishful thinking. And I don’t wish for the dissolution of the Republican Party; we need a two-party, or perhaps a three-party, system to reign in one another from their excesses.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Are you saying that Hillary is not sharp enough to recognize what kind of information should and should not be transferred on a non-government server with regard to national security? Does she need a designation of classified to know that it is by virtue of her position as SoS?

No not at all. I actually believe the contrary. That SoS Clinton is quite sharp. An intelligent and experienced woman quite ready to step into the Presidency in 305 days on day one, Jan 20, 2017. So I was just saying SoS Clinton is certainly sharp enough to know the meaning of the word, “retroactive”. Tha’s all I was saying.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I would not have an abortion myself, I believe a fetus is a human being at conception. However, I also support religious freedom, so I do not believe Roe v Wade should be overturned since some religions do not believe a six week old, an eight week old fetus is a human person since it is not viable outside the womb.

And if some religions hold that a two-week-old is not a human person, would one be okay with that being legal as well? Some have, you know.

And, of course, Roe did not say “no abortions after a child becomes viable outside the womb”. It, and the Dem party and Hillary Clinton approve partial-birth abortion, which is exactly the permissive killing of a viable child if the mother wants it killed.

There aren’t many laws in this country that do not have some kind of religious underpinning; from prohibition of usury to the Uniform Commercial Code. If “it’s legal” is the source of our mores, then we don’t actually have any mores at all. We are relativists, Modernists if one will, for whom all morals are relative and negotiable. We have no principles, only values.

It’s interesting, really, how much damage the Protestant reformation has done to our sense of what’s moral and what isn’t. It has made everything relative to “what I think about it”, giving way only at times to “what others think about it” when one’s own sense of right and wrong is insufficiently strong to discourage accommodation.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Some religions believe a woman is the property of a man (either de facto or de jure).
Should we “respect” their right to do so?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Some engage in class warfare; they would not give one party a chance no matter what, following party line is more important than religion. Beware of disingenuous arguments.

Disingenuous is the argument that says Democrats engage in class warfare while ignoring the Republicans engaging in class warfare. The difference is their warfare benefits the rich while not enough trickles down. I thought Jesus had some things to say about the rich if my memory serves me right. Democrats at least are striving for a somewhat fairer more level playing field.

 

[mary_bobo]

No not at all. I actually believe the contrary. That SoS Clinton is quite sharp. An intelligent and experienced woman quite ready to step into the Presidency in 305 days on day one, Jan 20, 2017. So I was just saying SoS Clinton is certainly sharp enough to know the meaning of the word, “retroactive”. Tha’s all I was saying.

Are you telling me that since (according to her) those e-mails were not marked classified, it was alright? I gave you credit for being smarter than that.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Not so’s you can tell. But I guess I got poisoned by the spectacle of “Cash for Clunkers” in which people who could afford new cars anyway were given a subsidy, while the “clunkers” poor people depend on were destroyed.

And then, when the Dems had total power over the nation, did they do anything for the poorest, the disabled poor? No. Nothing. Nor for the non-disabled poor either. Well, they did finally arrange to have abortifacients available for poor women for free.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Are you telling me that since (according to her) those e-mails were not marked classified, it was alright? I gave you credit for being smarter than that.

Ultimately, I believe, it will become public that her staff was instructed to strip “classified” from emails sent to her and to avoid ever putting that label on others even for the most sensitive information.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Not so’s you can tell. But I guess I got poisoned by the spectacle of “Cash for Clunkers” in which people who could afford new cars anyway were given a subsidy, while the “clunkers” poor people depend on were destroyed.

And then, when the Dems had total power over the nation, did they do anything for the poorest, the disabled poor? No. Nothing. Nor for the non-disabled poor either. Well, they did finally arrange to have abortifacients available for poor women for free.

Yet so many still believe thevDems are for the little guy…pffffffttt!