quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Bill Clinton takes a shot at Obama?

Bill Clinton in a speech today:

Starts at around 40 secs in



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9bsP2As3uc

Old BJ has really lost it, hasn't he?

He's still "an uncommonly good liar" though.

quote:

Old BJ has really lost it, hasn't he?

He certainly has!

I realize that stump speeches are usually not great oratory but Bill's verged on incoherence.

He is a pale shadow of the old Slick Willie.

quote:

Old BJ has really lost it, hasn't he?

He's still "an uncommonly good liar" though.

Well...if he would have had good doctors, he never would have needed a heart by-pass. When your heart is stopped, the heart pump is responsible for making sure your brain gets enough oxygen enriched blood. Looks like his heart pump was a Republican. Poor ole Bill.

41

Is it my wishful thinking or is Biden getting out more? There seems to be more positive press coverage for old joe.

He was in Seattle yesterday getting pizza and hillary is going to be here today.

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:
Is it my wishful thinking or is Biden getting out more? There seems to be more positive press coverage for old joe.

He was in Seattle yesterday getting pizza and hillary is going to be here today.

The reluctant savior has been seen in carefully crafted image shaping events lately.

That and Phauxcahontas getting into twitter wars because Trump made fun of her for lying about being an indian.

The Dems have a real winning team on their hands.

I so hope this article is true. This is where things could get really interesting.

http://www.investors.com/polit...-was-trying-to-hide/

Newly released documents reveal part of what Hillary Clinton was hoping to hide by using a personal email account for official government business. With the Clintons, it’s all about building an empire.

Judicial Watch released 276 documents Tuesday that had been obtained through one of its Freedom of Information Act lawsuits. Among the material are emails that show the State Department under Clinton was coordinating with the Clinton Foundation staff and how foreign governments sought favor through the intertwined State Department-Clinton Foundation link.

The latest batch of emails shows that foreign interests in Libya and Syria were among the many that took advantage of the State’s close ties to the Clinton Foundation.

It was previously discovered that governments in Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman made donations to the foundation in return for, as far as we can tell, favorable treatment by the State Department.

Judicial Watch reminds us that the Clinton Foundation has “accepted millions of dollars from at least seven foreign governments while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state,” including “a $500,000 donation it received from the government of Algeria while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state (that) violated a 2008 ethics agreement between the foundation and the Obama administration.”

In all, nearly 200 Clinton Foundation donors have played politics with Clinton’s State Department, and it’s known, as we’ve reported, that at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department while Clinton was there donated more than $26 million to the Foundation.

The Libya connection, by the way, was made just two days after the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorists attacks on U.S. personnel and grounds in Benghazi.

The message was focused on the wish of Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, president of Libya’s National Congress, “to meet President Clinton and to participate at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting for New York.”

It was forwarded to Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, by the Clinton Foundation’s director of foreign policy, Amitabh Desai.

Related to above post:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/p...-clinton-foundation/

In September 13, 2012, al-Magariaf advisor Dr. Fathi Nuah wrote to the Clinton Foundation’s Director of Foreign Policy Amitabh Desai: “Dr. Almagariaf will be addressing the United Nations this September in New York as the Libyan Head of State, and he expressed a wish to meet President Clinton and to participate at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting for New York as well.”

Four hours later, Desai emailed Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills asking, “Would USG [U.S. Government] have concerns about Libyan President being invited to CGI [Clinton Global Initiative]? Odd timing, I know.” Mills emailed back: “We would not have issues.”

Four days later, on September 17, Desai emailed Mills again, saying, The Libyan president is “asking for a meeting with WJC [William Jefferson Clinton] next week.” Desai asked, “Would you recommend accepting or declining the WJC meeting request?”

The State Department apparently had no objection to the meeting, because on September 26, Desai emailed Mills, “He had a v good meeting with Libya …” Hillary Clinton and al-Magariaf did not have a meeting until September 24.

An August 2009 email chain including Hillary Clinton’s then- Chief of Staff Huma Abedin, Mills, then-Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Jake Sullivan shows that the State Department coordinated with Clinton Foundation staff on how Mrs. Clinton to thank Foundation supporters/partners for their “commitments.”

Mills asks Desai for a “list of commitments during whole session so she can reference more than those just around her speech.”

As previously reported, a June 2012 email chain discusses a “firm invitation for President Clinton” to speak at a Congo conference, hosted in part by the controversial Joseph Kabila. Bill Clinton is offered $650,000 in fees and expenses, concerning which, as Desai emails Mills and others, “WJC wants to know that state [sic] thinks of it if he took it 100% for the foundation.”

This lawsuit had previously forced the disclosure of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to at least $48 million in speaking fees for the Clintons during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.

Looks like they may be pulling some emails from Hillary's server.

http://thehill.com/policy/nati...from-clintons-server

Conservative legal watchdogs have discovered new emails from Hillary Clinton’s private email server dating back to the first days of her tenure as secretary of State.

The previously undisclosed February 2009 emails between Clinton from her then-chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, raise new questions about the scope of emails from Clinton’s early days in office that were not handed over to the State Department for recordkeeping and may have been lost entirely.

Clinton’s presidential campaign has previously claimed that the former top diplomat did not use her personal "clintonemail.com" account before March 2009, weeks after she was sworn in as secretary of State.
But on Thursday, the watchdog group Judicial Watch released one message from Feb. 13, 2009, in which Mills communicated with Clinton on the account to discuss the National Security Agency’s (NSA) efforts to produce a secure BlackBerry device for her to use as secretary of State.

The discovery is likely to renew questions about Clinton’s narrative about her use of the private email server, which has come under scrutiny.

Last year, news organizations reported that Obama administration officials had discovered an email chain between Clinton and retired Gen. David Petraeus that began before Clinton entered office and continued through to Feb. 1. The chain of emails began on an earlier email system that Clinton used while serving in the Senate, but was reportedly transferred on to the clintonemail.com server.

In 2014, Clinton gave the State Department roughly 30,000 emails from her time in office that she said related to her work as the nation’s top diplomat. Another roughly 30,000 emails, which Clinton said contained personal information such as her daughter’s wedding plans and yoga routines, were deleted.

However, critics have questioned her decision to unilaterally delete the allegedly private emails without getting official input to determine which messages were personal and which were work-related.

Tom Fitton, the head of Judicial Watch, has said that he expects all of the emails to eventually come to light.

The State Department's publicly released stash of Clinton emails begins on March 18, 2009. The new emails discovered by Judicial Watch are not contained in the State Department’s files.

A State Department official said on Thursday that Clinton “has previously acknowledged that she emailed with department officials before March 18, 2009, the date of the first email in the collection that former Secretary Clinton provided to the Department in December 2014."

“Former Secretary Clinton has also indicated that she does not have access to work-related emails beyond those she turned over to the Department,” the official added, while noting that Clinton has confirmed in court proceedings that she gave over all the work-related messages she had.

"In September 2015, we also asked the FBI to inform us should it recover any records from Secretary Clinton’s server that we don’t already have,” the official added.

In the email released on Thursday, Mills told Clinton that an NSA official “indicated they could address our BB [BlackBerry] so that BB could work in” secure spaces, “based upon some modifications that could be done.”

“That’s good news,” Clinton responded.

Previous emails released as a result of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit have shown that the NSA dismissed initial attempts by Clinton’s team to secure her BlackBerry.

Fitton, the Judicial Watch head, described Thursday’s email as a repudiation of Clinton’s timeline.

“So now we know that, contrary to her statement under oath suggesting otherwise, Hillary Clinton did not turn over all her government emails,” he said in a statement. “We also know why Hillary Clinton falsely suggests she didn’t use clintonemail.com account prior to March, 18, 2009 — because she didn’t want Americans to know about her February 13, 2009, email that shows that she knew her Blackberry and email use was not secure.”

Drop by drop. If, after all this, the FBI does not recommend charges brought against this crook, I would be astonished. In terms of the election, it matters not if Obama's corrupt State Dept will do what is called for. Given all of the very, very bad news for her that keeps coming out, I think her destruction is inevitable. I imagine we should know something in the next 4 or 5 weeks.

I'm thinking Hillary gets indicted after she reaches 2383 delegates, and Shotgun Joe will be revealed as the DNC's white knight at the Demonrat convention.

As far as her "statement under oath," remember that it was made on information and belief, not the same as a straight forward sworn statement that the contents are true of the declarants own knowledge. There is wiggle room there.

It almost seems that there is a back and forth already in play. HRC makes some statement on her innocence, then a tidbit comes out from the other side. I wouldnt be ashtonished if shes already toast and the game is being played for her husband and kid.

what the hell is Chelsea Clinton talking about ?

Chelsea is saying Hillary Clinton will use executive action or tax credits to address the crushing costs of obamacare. ??

obamacare is already heavily subsidized. Clinton wants more subsidy? Executive action ?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/2001707

CBO estimates there will 12 million people in obamacare by the end of 2016 (previous estimates were 21 million)

CBO is also revising downward the estimates of how many people in obamacare are unsubsidized (almost everyone in obamacare gets subsidized)

12 million. We ruined healthcare in America for 4 % of the population.

They will never tell us how many of the 12 million had insurance before obamacare had their previous policies canceled and forced them onto obamacare.

background on Bryan Pagliano

http://www.reuters.com/article...linton-idUSKCN0WR00X

Soon after Hillary Clinton's arrival at the State Department in 2009, officials in the information technology office were baffled when told that a young technician would join them as a political appointee

Patrick Kennedy, the department's under secretary for management, oversaw the hiring of Pagliano

Kennedy shared Pagliano's résumé in 2009 with Susan Swart, then the head of the department's Bureau of Information Resource Management and chief adviser to the secretary on the department's information technology systems, and her deputy, Charlie Wisecarver.

Wisecarver and Swart, who had worked in the department for decades, were soon swapping emails expressing confusion and surprise that a political appointee, a so-called Schedule C employee who is more commonly hired to work in the secretary of state's offices, should be joining the IT department's ranks.

Schedule C employees, who help presidential appointees and agency heads make policy, can only report to people appointed by the U.S. president or other senior executive officials.

But no one like that worked in the IT office, so Kennedy ended up being Pagliano's designated supervisor.

The department told Reuters that Pagliano and Kennedy had little contact, and that Kennedy was unaware of the server or his subordinate's role in running it.

Nor did Wisecarver, Pagliano's day-to-day boss, or Swart know, according to the former colleague, who said the IT office should have been informed.

Pagliano received an IT security briefing in late 2010 or early 2011 "in connection with his work on the Secretary's non-government server

*******************

reminder: Clinton keeps saying no one had to approve her private server. It was okay to do.

But this report indicates that Pagliano got shoved into State Dept IT and then worked on the server w/o informing others in State Dept.

It was "ok" because Pagliano did it in secrecy.

Of course at this point not too many career State Dept employees want to admit they knew what was happening.

I'm telling you- the FBI is going to recommend charges against her. I now have no doubt. Probably mid to late April or early May, from what I gather.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I'm telling you- the FBI is going to recommend charges against her. I now have no doubt. Probably mid to late April or early May, from what I gather.

What do you think the FBI's reaction will be if the AG doesn't move on it? Personally I don't think there will be a mass exodus.

I imagine an explosion of indignation throughout the government, particularly in the FBI, if an indictment is not forthcoming after a recommendation is made. I have no doubt Comey will resign. It will be a huge scandal. And yes, I imagine mass resignations.