Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy?

[mark dennis]

I don't think she has done some thing which she should not do i think give her chance to prove herself.

[1714920044]

1714920044

[1714920044]

1714920044

[1714920044]

1714920044

[1714920044]

1714920044

[1714920044]

1714920044

[Wilikon]

I don't think she has done some thing which she should not do i think give her chance to prove herself.

What does that even mean? Are you using google translate?

 

[Wilikon]

State Dept Allowed Clinton Foundation To Review Emails Before Releasing Them To Congress And FOIA Requesters


State Department officials began allowing the Clinton Foundation to review emails the government planned to release to Congress and Freedom of Information Act requesters in January 2014, prompting a process that has delayed the publication of agency records for months, according to the group pursuing the records.

Many of the emails Clinton Foundation officials were permitted to review discussed the charity’s work, as well as the hundreds of ethics reviews that former President Clinton faced as a result of his paid-speaking engagements around the world while his wife, Hillary Clinton, was secretary of state.

“On top of the obstruction that is in no small measure criminal in nature — with the hiding, removal and destruction of records by Mrs. Clinton — they are sending these records out to the foundation that are the very subject of these public controversies,” said Tom Fitton.


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/state-department-allowing-clinton-foundation-to-approve-emails-for-release/article/2563806?utm_campaign=Fox%20News&utm_source=foxnews.com&utm_medium=feed

[bumpk1nK]

State Dept Allowed Clinton Foundation To Review Emails Before Releasing Them To Congress And FOIA Requesters


State Department officials began allowing the Clinton Foundation to review emails the government planned to release to Congress and Freedom of Information Act requesters in January 2014, prompting a process that has delayed the publication of agency records for months, according to the group pursuing the records.

Many of the emails Clinton Foundation officials were permitted to review discussed the charity’s work, as well as the hundreds of ethics reviews that former President Clinton faced as a result of his paid-speaking engagements around the world while his wife, Hillary Clinton, was secretary of state.

“On top of the obstruction that is in no small measure criminal in nature — with the hiding, removal and destruction of records by Mrs. Clinton — they are sending these records out to the foundation that are the very subject of these public controversies,” said Tom Fitton.


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/state-department-allowing-clinton-foundation-to-approve-emails-for-release/article/2563806?utm_campaign=Fox%20News&utm_source=foxnews.com&utm_medium=feed

More fucking bullshit. I hope none of you guys vote her into office. That would suck bills balls!

[BADecker]

In a way this is a silly thread topic. She is trustworthy. It all has to do with how smart you are to trust her to do what. Trust her to do whatever kinds of things will make her money and give her control.

[stevegreer]

Not sure if it has been said already or not.... but NO!!!!!

[Chef Ramsay]

It's crony capitalism, otherwise known as corporatism or fascism

Otherwise known as capitalism IN REALITY, AKA corporate fascism.

True capitalism is what raises the most amount of people out of poverty while keeping the govt at a minimal level at most to protect individual rights and allows people to achieve their dreams by staying out of the way nor being used by corporations to further their interests at the expense of taxpayers.

This "true" capitalism you describe, where can I find it? Where can I experience it? You've described something beautiful here, a Unicorn economic system... only... like the unicorn, I'm not sure it ever truly existed outside the minds of american libertarians.

I'm just defining terms and many leftists conflate what real capitalism is because the representation of the terms isn't correct. I don't disagree w/ your statement about corporate fascism but that, by definition, isn't capitalism.

For instance, capitalism's definition-1st on google search

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

or

a social system based on the principle of individual rights. Politically, it is the system of laissez-faire (freedom). Legally it is a system of objective laws (rule of law as opposed to rule of man). Economically, when such freedom is applied to the sphere of production its result is the free-market.

Corporate fascism is when major corporations lobby govt officials/buy off politicians to get the rules and market skewed in their favor in a major way to lock out the small guy and/or get taxpayer funds for their own use. Capitalism works w/ small government or in the case of the US, their constitutionally authorized republic. As govt morphs into a welfare/warfare state or some level of each, corporate fascism can take over. Govt's natural trajectory is to grow when the public and corporations realize they can vote themselves portions of the public treasure instead of officials abiding by their constitutional oaths. Not much I can do about that just pointing out the different terms and societal operations.

[Chef Ramsay]

AP-GFK POLL: DOUBTS ABOUT CLINTON'S HONESTY AFTER EMAILS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans appear to be suspicious of Hillary Rodham Clinton's honesty, and even many Democrats are only lukewarm about her presidential candidacy, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

Is she strong and decisive? Yes, say a majority of people. But inspiring and likable? Only a minority think so.

Clinton's struggles to explain her email practices while in government, along with questions about the Clinton Foundation and Republican criticism of her openness, wealth and trustworthiness seem to have struck a nerve in the public's perception of the dominant Democratic figure in the 2016 campaign. In the survey, 61 percent said "honest" describes her only slightly well or not at all.

More...http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEM_2016_CLINTON_POLL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-01-15-25-38

[Wilikon]

AP-GFK POLL: DOUBTS ABOUT CLINTON'S HONESTY AFTER EMAILS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans appear to be suspicious of Hillary Rodham Clinton's honesty, and even many Democrats are only lukewarm about her presidential candidacy, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

Is she strong and decisive? Yes, say a majority of people. But inspiring and likable? Only a minority think so.

Clinton's struggles to explain her email practices while in government, along with questions about the Clinton Foundation and Republican criticism of her openness, wealth and trustworthiness seem to have struck a nerve in the public's perception of the dominant Democratic figure in the 2016 campaign. In the survey, 61 percent said "honest" describes her only slightly well or not at all.

More...http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEM_2016_CLINTON_POLL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-01-15-25-38

Did I ever say I am not a fan of 0bama? Maybe I did already  The thing is 0bama is a natural marvin gaye of political lies. A smile worth a billion $$$

Hillary is just bleh... That is why she lost against him for the nomination in 2008. The democrats will nominate her anyway because she has a vagina. Nothing else.

[Chef Ramsay]

AP-GFK POLL: DOUBTS ABOUT CLINTON'S HONESTY AFTER EMAILS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans appear to be suspicious of Hillary Rodham Clinton's honesty, and even many Democrats are only lukewarm about her presidential candidacy, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

Is she strong and decisive? Yes, say a majority of people. But inspiring and likable? Only a minority think so.

Clinton's struggles to explain her email practices while in government, along with questions about the Clinton Foundation and Republican criticism of her openness, wealth and trustworthiness seem to have struck a nerve in the public's perception of the dominant Democratic figure in the 2016 campaign. In the survey, 61 percent said "honest" describes her only slightly well or not at all.

More...http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEM_2016_CLINTON_POLL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-01-15-25-38

Did I ever say I am not a fan of 0bama? Maybe I did already  The thing is 0bama is a natural marvin gaye of political lies. A smile worth a billion $$$

Hillary is just bleh... That is why she lost against him for the nomination in 2008. The democrats will nominate her anyway because she has a vagina. Nothing else.

Perhaps but I'd like to see the Sanders-socialist take on the Hillary-fascist for the democratic nomination rather than her just walking through the forest unscathed. Tho, it could be uncouth for democrats to choose between the two. Hopefully, the sensible outside bunch will wade into the GOP primary and support Rand.

[bumpk1nK]

AP-GFK POLL: DOUBTS ABOUT CLINTON'S HONESTY AFTER EMAILS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans appear to be suspicious of Hillary Rodham Clinton's honesty, and even many Democrats are only lukewarm about her presidential candidacy, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

Is she strong and decisive? Yes, say a majority of people. But inspiring and likable? Only a minority think so.

Clinton's struggles to explain her email practices while in government, along with questions about the Clinton Foundation and Republican criticism of her openness, wealth and trustworthiness seem to have struck a nerve in the public's perception of the dominant Democratic figure in the 2016 campaign. In the survey, 61 percent said "honest" describes her only slightly well or not at all.

More...http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEM_2016_CLINTON_POLL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-01-15-25-38

Did I ever say I am not a fan of 0bama? Maybe I did already  The thing is 0bama is a natural marvin gaye of political lies. A smile worth a billion $$$

Hillary is just bleh... That is why she lost against him for the nomination in 2008. The democrats will nominate her anyway because she has a vagina. Nothing else.

I couldn't agree more about the Obama billion $$ smile. Thank god hes leaving office tho. it time for a change just not Hillary

[Mikestang]

They're all puppets of their corporate sponsors, it doesn't matter what candidate is put in front of "the people".  When you can only choose from 1 2 or 3 then it's really not a choice at all.

[Chef Ramsay]

Hillary Clinton Won’t Support Legal Weed Any Time Soon, But She Should

...
But it seems that Clinton diverges from Millennials on an issue we are repeatedly associated with: marijuana legalization.

Clinton is not necessarily opposed to pot legalization but, as Vox notes, her stance is very similar to that of President Obama and many other politicians.

It’s evident she doesn’t see legalization as a pressing issue, and she would rather leave it up to each individual state. She’s also argued she doesn’t believe research surrounding the benefits of medicinal marijuana is conclusive.

But at present, polls show a majority of Americans, especially Democrats, support the legalization of marijuana.

Even within this majority, Millennials stick out in terms of their pro-pot stance.

More...http://elitedaily.com/news/politics/hillary-clinton-wont-support-legal-weed-time-soon/999113/

[Chef Ramsay]

Hollywood bundlers are losing the spotlight 4 HRC or are they?

...
To be sure, a bevy of the usual suspects are busy on both coasts raising thousands of $2,700 contributions — the maximum that any single donor can give to a candidate’s primary campaign committee. That’s the price tag at two Hollywood events slated for Clinton on May 7, a luncheon at the home of TV producer Steven Bochco and his wife, Dayna, and a dinner at the home of Power Rangers magnate Haim Saban and his wife, Cheryl.

The Sabans, in particular, are longtime Clinton friends and supporters, who have been raising and giving money to both Bill and Hillary Clinton for 20 years.

Meantime, Andy Spahn, the longtime political adviser to such entertainment industry titans as David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, is doing the same thing: Focusing on the first round of hard-money donors and raising money for Clinton through social media appeals.
“It’s back to the future,” said one major Los Angeles Democratic donor and party activist. “Andy Spahn, like a good soldier, is bundling, bundling, bundling.”

At least one top Hollywood fundraiser quarreled with the notion that longtime donors are feeling left out or disempowered. In the 1990s, before the 2002 McCain-Feingold law’s ban on soft money, the national party committees could raise large amounts from individual donors to pay for “issue ads” promoting candidates, effectively in full coordination with their campaigns.
...

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hollywood-bundlers-are-losing-the-spotlight-117565.html#ixzz3Z8KnG3Cv

[MsCollec]

She's still the best candidate

[Chef Ramsay]

She's still the best candidate

Yeah, the best for the ultimate failure of the US. The only candidate that can right the US ship, if that's even possible aka reduce debt, is Rand Paul. Hillary is a top notch warmonger in the field of Dick Cheney. She, as a Senator, was all for the Iraq war and all of the above. Then as SOS, started the fling in LIbya which created more instability and sent weapons to IS and we've all seen what has happened in Iraq and Syria because of that.

[TheButterZone]

She's still the best candidate

The only candidate "better" than her would be one who promises to cause an extinction-level event: nuclear WWIII.

[Chef Ramsay]

She's still the best candidate

The only candidate "better" than her would be one who promises to cause an extinction-level event: nuclear WWIII.

Higher intelligence comes when it was thought extinct. I'm hoping that Ms was just messing around tho I doubt it.

[newflesh]

She's a politician, that's proof enough she's not trustworthy

I think we need to get away from the idea that she represents progressives ideals, modern day democrats are more rightwing than left from what I can see.

[Wilikon]

Bill Clinton: Foundation didn’t do anything ‘knowingly inappropriate’

Bill Clinton says he has no regrets about taking millions in foreign cash for his foundation — even though the donations have caused a political headache for Hillary Clinton as she tries to follow him into the Oval Office.

In an exclusive interview with NBC News' Cynthia McFadden, the former president said his charity has never done anything "knowingly inappropriate."

Under pressure, the foundation recently announced it will only accept contributions from six Western governments going forward, but Clinton says that's no acknowledgment the old policy — under which Saudi Arabia gave between $10 million and $25 million, for instance — was a mistake.

"Absolutely not," Clinton told NBC News during his current tour of Africa to visit a wide variety of the foundation's projects.

"It's an acknowledgement that we're going to come as close as we can during her presidential campaign to following the rules we followed when she became secretary of state."

The 42nd president says he is "proud" of his foundation's work.


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bill-clinton-defends-his-foundations-foreign-money-n352981