Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy?

[subSTRATA]

Yes completely.because she is a politician.and politicians do their jobs by lying.and hillary is one of the most famous poltician.so you can believe in her that she does her job well and tell lies everyday.

cant tell if this is sarcastic or not anymore.

in other news, hillary's popularity seems to be declining: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article38007336.html
looks like people cant ignore the whole email scandal anymore, people need to wake up and start giving a shit; these kinds of people are the ones expected to lead a country ffs.

[Wilikon]

Hillary drops 19 points … in California.


http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article38007336.html

[Wilikon]

Can Clinton's Email Scandal Get Worse? It Already Is


Corruption: Hillary Clinton has complained about the steady "drip, drip, drip" of revelations about her email troubles. This week, the drips became a torrent. Will her presidential aspirations drown in a flood of scandal?

The news cycle turned Tuesday night on reports that a second server handling Clinton's State Department emails has been found, raising questions about just how many people had access to the classified material on her emails.

How much did her negligence increase the country's vulnerability to espionage?

How widely did she expose herself to blackmail?

For months we've known that Clinton used Platte River Networks in Colorado to manage her email server — which had been in her house while she was secretary of state — after she left the State Department.

Now we know that Datto Inc. in Connecticut has been used as a second data storage site for her emails.

This came to light Tuesday when Sen. Ron Johnson, the Wisconsin Republican who chairs the Senate Homeland Security Committee, asked Datto in a letter to turn over any Clinton emails that it has.

That doesn't hold up, though, unless it turns out that a concerned Platte River Networks employee is a Republican operative.

When this employee noticed that Clinton representatives had asked "Datto to reduce the amount of her emails it was backing up," he or she became suspicious, the McClatchy Washington bureau reported. The employee sent off an email that said "this whole thing really is covering up some shaddy (sic) sh*t."

Another Platte River Networks employee — or possibly the same one, it isn't clear — sent an email saying "this is a problem" when "Platte River employees discovered that her private server was syncing with an offsite Datto server," McClatchy reported.

Apparently, the Clinton camp wanted to be sure some emails weren't going to be saved.

That raises another question, one that has been asked many times throughout this scandal but never satisfactorily answered:

What is Clinton trying to hide?

The morning after the Datto news broke, the Washington Free Beacon reported that the FBI has seized four State Department servers in its probe of Clinton's personal email system. Investigators want to know "how top secret material was sent to Clinton's private email by State Department aides."

Remember, Clinton has said multiple times that there was never classified material in her personal email. Yet there it is, and the FBI wants to know why.

Clinton has also said constantly that she has turned over all the emails that investigators and officials have asked for. She even signed a statement in which she swore "under penalty of perjury" that she had produced all emails that were, or potentially were, federal records.

Yet, as we have noted, officials keep asking for more emails because they don't think Clinton has handed over everything. So we naturally wonder if she perjured herself when she signed the statement.

Clinton could have avoided all this if she had simply elected to use the State Department's secure email rather than her own account managed by a private server located in her personal residence.

But she didn't, and voters need to know why, just as much as they need to know what her involvement in the Benghazi disaster was.

Even those who fully stand behind her political positions should hold back their support until either Clinton comes clean or the investigations are completed.

If the investigations go beyond the next election, that's just the way it is.


http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/100715-774536-hillary-email-scandal-get-even-more-scandalous.htm?p=full

[galdur]

We´re always being outnegotiated because our people are babies, says The Donald. How true. And the 70-year old man-children. Oh, my gosh. Some of them are probably dying to have their dicks chopped off.
Sounds crazy, but nowadays I´m probably the crazy one for daring to mention that having mentally unstable people in charge can be extremely dangerous.

Donald Trump: 'Let Russia fight ISIS'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJHgA4_0CAo

On a lighter dick note, here´s a little story from the great Lance Henriksen, one if the very best movie             scumbags that I´ve loved to hate

(On filming The Pit and the Pendulum with Oliver Reed) I remember the day when Oliver Reed came in. He was playing a cardinal, sent by the Pope.... He was such a loose canon. When I met him, we said our hellos and then he said, "You want to see something?" I said, "What?" And he out his dick. The head was tattooed with what looked like an ace of spades - it was a quick glance. I said, "Put that ugly fucking thing away." He just laughed. That night, we all sat down for a big welcoming dinner - the director, the producers and the cast. There must have been thirty of us. And there were these bowls of apples on the table. And lots of wine! Oliver took an apple and he put it on the table in front of him. Then he slammed his fist down and turned it into applesauce. It just went everywhere. That was exactly the kind of release I was looking for. I just wanted to let (my character) go, because I felt so restrained. I felt like I had wound the watch too far, and the spring was so tight. So I grabbed an apple and I did it too. I slammed it and it went everywhere. Everyone at the table was appalled. And I thought, Perfect. After that, I took Oliver's lead for the rest of the night. We proceeded to drink all of the white wine on the table - about ten bottles of local wine - and then went into this evening of oblivion. I remember literally climbing the wall outside the castle - this 150-foot high, almost completely vertical wall. We climbed all the way to the top and stood on the edge, screaming down at the town below. That's the last thing I remember. The next thing I remember was waking up in bed the next morning, and my clothes were hanging on the doorknob outside my room...and they were completely shredded. I don't know what the hell the story was there.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000448/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

[subSTRATA]

Hillary drops 10 points in just 1 week: http://www.businessinsider.com/clintons-support-plunged-10-points-2015-10

Clinton's support among Democratic voters fell 10 points within less than a week.

From October 4 to October 9, Clinton saw her support tumble from 51 percent of Democratic support to just 41 percent.

Her nearest competitors, Vermont Senator Sanders and Vice President of the U.S. Joe Biden, who has yet to decide whether he will run, both made gains. Support for Sanders jumped from just over 24 percent to 28 percent, and Biden rose from 16 percent to a even 20 percent in the same time period.

[chennan]

Her nearest competitors, Vermont Senator Sanders and Vice President of the U.S. Joe Biden, who has yet to decide whether he will run, both made gains. Support for Sanders jumped from just over 24 percent to 28 percent, and Biden rose from 16 percent to a even 20 percent in the same time period.

I seriously think the only candidate who has the best shot of winning is going to be Sanders... there is so much support from him amongst the young democratic voters.  This notion of electing Hillary just because she is a woman is starting to disappear, and the democratic voters are actually starting to look more into Hillary's history... which could be considered a good/bad thing for the republican party.  I think if Hillary would be elected it would be a shoe in to get a republican candidate elected for the presidency, because they will non stop call her out on all the bad things she's done over the years... While Sanders has a pretty clean history with radical socialist ideas, that I think a majority of the young people want... for some reason I don't really understand.

[Wilikon]

Her nearest competitors, Vermont Senator Sanders and Vice President of the U.S. Joe Biden, who has yet to decide whether he will run, both made gains. Support for Sanders jumped from just over 24 percent to 28 percent, and Biden rose from 16 percent to a even 20 percent in the same time period.

I seriously think the only candidate who has the best shot of winning is going to be Sanders... there is so much support from him amongst the young democratic voters.  This notion of electing Hillary just because she is a woman is starting to disappear, and the democratic voters are actually starting to look more into Hillary's history... which could be considered a good/bad thing for the republican party.  I think if Hillary would be elected it would be a shoe in to get a republican candidate elected for the presidency, because they will non stop call her out on all the bad things she's done over the years... While Sanders has a pretty clean history with radical socialist ideas, that I think a majority of the young people want... for some reason I don't really understand.

Is sanders a candidate for the democrat party?

[subSTRATA]

Her nearest competitors, Vermont Senator Sanders and Vice President of the U.S. Joe Biden, who has yet to decide whether he will run, both made gains. Support for Sanders jumped from just over 24 percent to 28 percent, and Biden rose from 16 percent to a even 20 percent in the same time period.

I seriously think the only candidate who has the best shot of winning is going to be Sanders... there is so much support from him amongst the young democratic voters.  This notion of electing Hillary just because she is a woman is starting to disappear, and the democratic voters are actually starting to look more into Hillary's history... which could be considered a good/bad thing for the republican party.  I think if Hillary would be elected it would be a shoe in to get a republican candidate elected for the presidency, because they will non stop call her out on all the bad things she's done over the years... While Sanders has a pretty clean history with radical socialist ideas, that I think a majority of the young people want... for some reason I don't really understand.

Is sanders a candidate for the democrat party?

yes.

[galdur]

Well, Bernie sure was dead on Thirteen years ago, on October 9, 2002

.....Mr. Speaker, in the brief time I have, let me give five reasons why I am opposed to giving the President a blank check to launch a unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq and why I will vote against this resolution. One, I have not heard any estimates of how many young American men and women might die in such a war or how many tens of thousands of women and children in Iraq might also be killed. As a caring Nation, we should do everything we can to prevent the horrible suffering that a war will cause. War must be the last recourse in international relations, not the first. Second, I am deeply concerned about the precedent that a unilateral invasion of Iraq could establish in terms of international law and the role of the United Nations. If President Bush believes that the U.S. can go to war at any time against any nation, what moral or legal objection could our government raise if another country chose to do the same thing?

Third, the United States is now involved in a very difficult war against international terrorism as we learned tragically on September 11. We are opposed by Osama bin Laden and religious fanatics who are prepared to engage in a kind of warfare that we have never experienced before. I agree with Brent Scowcroft, Republican former National Security Advisor for President George Bush, Sr., who stated, "An attack on Iraq at this time would seriously jeopardize, if not destroy, the global counterterrorist campaign we have undertaken."

Fourth, at a time when this country has a $6 trillion national debt and a growing deficit, we should be clear that a war and a long-term American occupation ofIraq could be extremely expensive.

Fifth, I am concerned about the problems of so-called unintended consequences. Who will govern Iraq when Saddam Hussein is removed and what role will the U.S. play in ensuing a civil war that could develop in that country? Will moderate governments in the region who have large Islamic fundamentalist populations be overthrown and replaced by extremists? Will the bloody conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority be exacerbated? And these are just a few of the questions that remain unanswered. .....

[Wilikon]

Hillary server had remote-control gateways wide open




[...]
Clinton’s server, which handled her personal and State Department correspondence, appeared to allow users to connect openly over the Internet to control it remotely, according to detailed records compiled in 2012. Experts said the Microsoft remote desktop service wasn’t intended for such use without additional protective measures, and was the subject of U.S. government and industry warnings at the time over attacks from even low-skilled intruders.

[...]
Records show that Clinton additionally operated two more devices on her home network in Chappaqua, New York, that also were directly accessible from the Internet. One contained similar remote-control software that also has suffered from security vulnerabilities, known as Virtual Network Computing, and the other appeared to be configured to run websites.

[...]
“That’s total amateur hour,” said Marc Maiffret, who has founded two cyber security companies. He said permitting remote-access connections directly over the Internet would be the result of someone choosing convenience over security or failing to understand the risks. “Real enterprise-class security, with teams dedicated to these things, would not do this,” he said. …

The findings suggest Clinton’s server “violates the most basic network-perimeter security tenets: Don’t expose insecure services to the Internet,” said Justin Harvey, the chief security officer for Fidelis Cybersecurity.

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/10/13/hillary-server-had-remote-control-gateways-wide-open/
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/ap-clinton-server-ran-software-risked-hacking-34435250

[Wilikon]

Clinton: Australian-Style Gun Control 'Worth Considering' for U.S.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JctBYrIaKvY

[Chef Ramsay]

Clinton's Southern strategy? Hillary fakes her accent for local crowd

Hillary Clinton has started faking a Southern drawl to speak to Southerners, just as she did during her last presidential run eight years ago.

The tactic drew chuckles, derision and not a little resentment when she tried it in 2007 and 2008. But she was back at it again in Alabama on Saturday, putting on a heavy twang to express her contempt for Republicans.

With Bernie Sanders narrowing her lead or overtaking her in early caucus and primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire, Clinton is hoping for a "Southern firewall," and her itinerary of upcoming events reveals a determinatiion to set it ablaze quickly. She wants to win in South Carolina and then in the many Southern states holding primaries on "Super Tuesday," where Sanders is polling much worse.

...http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clintons-southern-strategy-hillary-fakes-accent-for-crowd/article/2574357

[CoinFoxs]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/30/voters-want-someone-who-is-honest-and-trustworthy-in-2016-they-dont-think-thats-hillary-clinton/

Hillary Clinton has a problem.  In a new Quinnipiac University national poll, more than one in three voters say that the most important trait they are looking for in a 2016 candidate is being "honest and trustworthy." Almost six in ten of those polled said that Hillary Clinton lacks those two traits.

Uh oh.

Clinton's problems with the honest/trustworthy question is not new. As I wrote back in April:

    There's a widespread belief in her capability to do the job she is running for. There's also widespread distrust in her personally.  People admire her but don't know if she's honest.

The Q poll trend line shows a steady line of distrust towards Clinton.  In May 39 percent of people said she was honest and trustworthy. In April that number was 38 percent. And, before you dismiss Clinton's honesty issue as simply the carping of Republicans, look inside the Q numbers.  Just 31 percent of independents describe her as honest and trustworthy while 62 percent say she is not. One in five Democrats (19 percent) say Clinton is not honest and trustworthy(!).

[Pentax]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/30/voters-want-someone-who-is-honest-and-trustworthy-in-2016-they-dont-think-thats-hillary-clinton/

Hillary Clinton has a problem.  In a new Quinnipiac University national poll, more than one in three voters say that the most important trait they are looking for in a 2016 candidate is being "honest and trustworthy." Almost six in ten of those polled said that Hillary Clinton lacks those two traits.

Uh oh.

Clinton's problems with the honest/trustworthy question is not new. As I wrote back in April:

    There's a widespread belief in her capability to do the job she is running for. There's also widespread distrust in her personally.  People admire her but don't know if she's honest.

The Q poll trend line shows a steady line of distrust towards Clinton.  In May 39 percent of people said she was honest and trustworthy. In April that number was 38 percent. And, before you dismiss Clinton's honesty issue as simply the carping of Republicans, look inside the Q numbers.  Just 31 percent of independents describe her as honest and trustworthy while 62 percent say she is not. One in five Democrats (19 percent) say Clinton is not honest and trustworthy(!).

Proving that 4 in 5 dems are either retarded or as crooked as she is.

[troleybüs]

Why would a normal person with more than 90 IQ trust ANY politician anyway?
All politicians are same. They only think their own welfare, nothing for humanity.

[chennan]

Why would a normal person with more than 90 IQ trust ANY politician anyway?
All politicians are same. They only think their own welfare, nothing for humanity.

Because until there is any other "reasonable" alternative to run a big developed country such as in the EU or in North America, for example, then there will always be a need for a politician(s) to run the country... a stable country cannot simply live in an anarchist world.

[Wilikon]

Why would a normal person with more than 90 IQ trust ANY politician anyway?
All politicians are same. They only think their own welfare, nothing for humanity.

Because until there is any other "reasonable" alternative to run a big developed country such as in the EU or in North America, for example, then there will always be a need for a politician(s) to run the country... a stable country cannot simply live in an anarchist world.

If only we the people could elect humans for whom they truly are and not "nudged" to do so. This statement is for R or the D. Of course more for the D

 

[chennan]

Why would a normal person with more than 90 IQ trust ANY politician anyway?
All politicians are same. They only think their own welfare, nothing for humanity.

Because until there is any other "reasonable" alternative to run a big developed country such as in the EU or in North America, for example, then there will always be a need for a politician(s) to run the country... a stable country cannot simply live in an anarchist world.

If only we the people could elect humans for whom they truly are and not "nudged" to do so. This statement is for R or the D. Of course more for the D

 

Even though I affiliate my self with the Republican party (even though I'm more libertarian than anything), both parties do in fact "nudge" people to elect certain candidates, whether it's for the countries favor or not.

Also, it seems people now n' days are more for the "diversification" of the white house more than anything.  People where so ecstatic when Barack came in because he was forever to be known as "the first black man in the white house", that people (mainly democrats) where nearly pissing themselves from excitement.  Now that hype and trend is now over... and feminist all around (who again, are mainly democratic) are looking for a the "first lady president in the white house".  It seems that democrats love to paint a picture of republicans as some "redneck, racist hick" who has no sympathy for people, but when people like Ben Carson comes along who is black (I don't support by the way), they just simply ignore the matter; or if they do delve in on the topic, they are quick to point out that he is an "Uncle Tom" sell out.

Politics are a necessity in life that is just a complete headache... along with a lot of other necessities in life.

[gogxmagog]

Hillary's top seven campaign contributors are BANKS. anyone who comes to these forums must grasp the implications of that fact alone. there is no way she can be mistaken for anything close to honest. Also, the way she acted during her husband's blowjob scandal negates her claims to being any way behind her claims of being a "feminist with the best interests of all women" Monica Lewinski was manipulated by Bill Clinton then thrown under the bus by Hillary. It doesn't even matter what you think of feminists, her actions show she is inherently duplicitous... meaning DISHONEST

[chennan]

If you guys are interested... Hillary is on damage control again with Benghazi... Turn it on to fox, cnn, or any other major news site and watch her tip toe around questions with me and join in on the fun!