Posted on 03/10/2015 4:33:58 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
Although the usual suspects eagerly slurped up the stale Clinton Kool-Aid as a rather unconvincing signal to the public that all is now well in the wake of Hillary's press conference on the email scandal, other liberal sources less interested in blindly flacking for her are much more skeptical. Among the latter is The Atlantic. The skepticism is evident in the very title of an article by David Graham, Hillary: Just Trust Me on This One.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
“I heard some of it via radio. The Clintons are trained professional liars. However Hillary must be losing her touch. It was a weak pathetic attempt.”
My gut feel is that it doesn’t work as well on a 21st century audience. No one under 40 believes the email crap, and the “most transparent administration ever” line is looking downright silly at this point.
Indeed. The 90's are over. A major portion of the country knows more about this stuff than Hillary does. And she has made a fool of herself with her idiocy about the "two phones" and the secret service guarding her back yard so no bad guys can get in to mess with her server. sheesh.
The reason the e-mails are needed is to investigate what brought forth the Benghazi attack. Benghazi and this e-mail coverup is no “scandal”. Just agreeing and venting with you.
Not everyone realizes that Hillary was censored by the judge for her part in Watergate.
Counsel confirms Hillary’s ‘fraudulent’ Watergate brief
http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/
Details of Hillary Clinton’s firing from the House Judiciary Committee staff for unethical behavior as she helped prepare articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon have been confirmed by the panel’s chief Republican counsel.
Franklin Polk backed up major claims by Jerry Zeifman, the general counsel and chief of staff
of the House Judiciary Committee who supervised Clinton’s work on the Watergate investigation in 1974, reported columnist Dan Calabrese in a column republished by WND.
Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, called Clinton a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.”
He contends Clinton was collaborating with allies of the Kennedys to block revelation of Kennedy-administration activities that made Watergate “look like a day at the beach.”
Her brief, Zeifman said, was so fraudulent and ridiculous, she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.
Polk confirmed Clinton wrote a brief arguing Nixon should not be granted legal counsel due to a lack of precedent. But Clinton deliberately ignored the then-recent case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who was allowed to have a lawyer during the impeachment attempt against him in 1970.
Moreover, Zeifman claims Clinton bolstered her fraudulent brief by removing all of the Douglas files from public access and storing them at her office, enabling her to argue as if the case never existed...
As was I. And Watergate deserved all the attention it got.
Here's a question for an inquiring mind like yours to ponder.
Hillary evidently stated several weeks ago that, at least at one time, she did carry more than one phone.
We have Hillary's own recent statement to the effect that one reason that a person might carry two phones is so that they can access two email accounts.
We know about "clintonemail.com".
Now for the question: What is the other email account that Hillary was accessing and who has the server?
Even if she isn’t covering anything up, using a private email is a viiolation of the Records Act, maybe a violation for mishandling classified information, and definitely an administrative violation of gov IT policies.
Do you have a source for that? Thanks.
Not expressed in that way. She stated that it was a matter of convenience to use only her private email account because it would be inconvenient to have to carry two devices in order to access a second account.
What was the reason for enduring the inconvenience of carrying two devices, as she was described doing several weeks ago, if not in order to access more than one account?
I see what you mean, yes, it was implied in her statement today that she would need two devices to use two accounts. There is so much bullcrap in just one Clintonian sentence it’s hard to keep track of all the implications that lie therein. Thanks for clarifying.
The Clintons are trained professional liars. However Hillary must be losing her touch”
Cackles is minor leagues compared to Buba. It is just further evidence that they haven’t lived under the same roof in 15 years, none of Bubas teflon has rubbed off to Hildabeasts advantage.
Agreed. All they need to do is leak some of the sleazier emails that Hillary thought she deleted, where she is soliciting contributions/bribes from nations where women are virtual slaves.
Release a dozen of those solicitations to the NYT along with the funds received, she’s toast.
I bought my tech challenged wife an Android Phone for Christmas so she could check her mails on two sites, handle them and to send replies or new emails. Our 13 year old grandson entered the two email accounts in her new Android phone. My wife was using both accounts in minutes. She said that was the easiest thing to learn and do with her Android.
Did Hill, the pathological liar, pay for that server, its installation and upkeep, or did our Tax $'s?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.