Hillary's "Server" scandal
- Thread starter Avid
- Start date
Jan Volkes
Well-Known Member
Is that not the American way? money doesn't talk it shouts, money may not be able to buy you love but it can buy most everything else, there is a law for you and a law for them, money sticks with money, you tell on me and I will tell on you,
if I go down we all go down.
People at the top are like the big banks, they are too big to be allowed to fail.
Upvote
0
Blank Stair
1 Peter 3:16
Yes, it's a collective effort as we know. They're all complicit.
Their actions have indeed been very deliberate ... though is seems a stretch to call most of their actions competent. Competence usually doesn't result in numerous legal investigations and prosecution after prosecution.[/QUOTE] That they were investigated follows their actions that gave authorities something to investigate. Meanwhile, the competence would come in not just in their committing to the morally questionable actions while in office (and out in the case of HC), but that in all this time they've never been arrested, prosecuted, or jailed as a result.
That's pretty competent.
Upvote
0
I have heard this from friends I have that live different places across the globe.
The American political media has lower ratings then the Congress of the United States. It's that bad!
Why? Majority of Americans are misrepresented by them. They know it, and they resent the way it is presented. Decent stories are more of a side note, and don't tend to go along with the narrative.
People here don't tend to trust the media outlets anymore, because they have become gossip rags.
People don't tend to trust the government officials, because they are all mouth and no action. When they do get something done? Its normally a mess. I can only think of a couple of items the government does effectively...and that frustrates people to no end.
This 'us against them' theme that is all the rage today isn't helpful. You can't talk, negotiate, or work anything out - because if you do? Your labeled immediately with the most awful labels. If people call them out on that? They are labeled too.
Everything is black and white. There is never any middle area anymore - according to the media and government officials.
When I was younger the nutters were spoken about in the news, but they were not taken to seriously. I mean their nutters. Today the more outrageous - they more they get the news. If you come across as going against that grain? Your mocked and they love to dig up dirt, making up stories is the way to go to TRY to shut that down. People pretend that humans have to be perfect in order to do politics, and pander to each and every group that is 'offended'. When they show themselves as human? lol if they are on the 'right' side of politics? They will get away with it, and if they aren't? They are history.
What people don't realize is times change, and so do politics....and they soon could be the target of this nonsense we have to much of today. Life has a way of doing that - call it Karma or whatever. They will be crying in the soup soon enough. Then it won't be so popular anymore...because its happening to them.
In the meantime most of us are losing hope as hate replaces rational thinking.
Hillary will be protected to a point. I would bet some parts of what she has done will be swept under the carpet, and some parts of it she will have to learn to live with. I personally don't trust her, because staying with a horndog husband was important to her climbing the ladder to power. He can be a 'nice guy' and well liked, but his integrity as a family man? Its just not there. Anyone that would harm their family in the spotlight like he did? If you can't be decent to the those that are closest to you? What makes people think he will do go for them? I would have more trust in her if she had divorced him, distanced herself from him, and moved on up that way. She used him as a tool instead, and put up with his nonsense. That is a huge character flaw to me, and it shows she will put up with anything....to get her gain. There is no ethics there.
Upvote
0
bhsmte
Newbie
Here is the deal.
Hilary has a real issue with trust. She is perceived as smug and not trustworthy and if you watch her body language and her words, it is not difficult to see how the majority reach this conclusion.
This is why Obama came out of nowhere in 2008 and was able to beat her and I am quite certain, her camp is very concerned. This email thing may sink her completely, or it may blow over and it will depend on what else is revealed about the details.
Upvote
0
Blank Stair
1 Peter 3:16
Just so this discussion may proceed with facts, the Clinton's have never been prosecuted for their alleged crimes while in the White house.
Bill was impeached by the House on two charges and acquitted by the Senate.
However, the Clinton's have not been prosecuted. They're slippery like that.
Bill was impeached by the House on two charges and acquitted by the Senate.
However, the Clinton's have not been prosecuted. They're slippery like that.
Upvote
0
Jan Volkes
Well-Known Member
Or she's innocent, has no one thought about that? all of her so called crimes could well be blown out of all proportion by the people who want to see her gone, if she is not being charged everyone immediately thinks 'cover up' and never 'she may be innocent'.
The US is well known as being the place where 'mob rule' first came into it's own, the more gullible the people the easier it is to manipulate them and even Americans will tell you that a very large proportion of Americans are very easily manipulated.
Upvote
0
Jan Volkes
Well-Known Member
What woman would want to believe that her husband has been unfaithful? are you condemning her for standing by her husband? does your religion make you perfect or do you just think it does?Just for the record ...
Upvote
0
Noting that Hillary's denial of Monica Lewinsky came long after proof of similar sexual encounters with Genifer Flowers and the numerous "bimbo eruptions" which occurred prior to and continued throughout Bill Clinton's presidency.
Deny them all you will. Bill did. Hillary did. They don't any more.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I don't think any spouse WANTS to believe it. Yet, sadly her husband was habitual adulterer. People knew that when they elected him, and they got to see it again once he was in office.
I personally didn't vote for him, because it was habitual. If it were a one time deal? I could let that slide. If he didn't care enough to deal with his family with care - why should I trust him to do so in public office? His wife and his child were repeated treated like garbage, but we all needed to jump on the happy train that he would be so awesome for US!
It was also well known that she and her husband made it their job to destroy the ladies - and other's involved that brought this to light. No, that isn't okay. That isn't part of standing by your man in any sense of the phrase. Upset with them? Of course. Can't stand the sight of them? Understandable. Destroy their lifes because they can? Not acceptable. Not in my book.
To me, this has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with integrity, character, etc.
I believe the only reason she STOOD by her husband was to ride his coat tails up the ladder of power. Quite frankly, she could have done it without him. I guess it was easier to do it with him though. I don't think anyone would have blamed her for the divorce - after his track record, and the humiliation he gifted his family. My heart was broken for her and their child at the time. He was slime in my book. At this point? The marriage I'm sure is one of convenience. I do hope they have made peace after all this time.
She had done things to make herself look untrustworthy herself. The acts themselves wouldn't look as bad on the surface if her actions backed them up. In fact many of actions tend to make me think - what is she hiding?
Upvote
0
Jan Volkes
Well-Known Member
Of course it has nothing to do with religion because neither of them are religious, they say they are because they must.
Most American politicians must tell a lie just to get to be a politician, that's the craziness of American political life,
they must start off by telling people [who actually believe them] that they believe in a myth, some do but most don't,
if they are to be believed they all do believe then it's a statistical impossibility.
Religions breed hypocrites, people who say one thing then do another, sex is dirty yet we are all here because of sex.
People are what they are and who knows what drives them? what makes one person strive for the top and another be happy with their lot? the human sexual libido plays a big part in how we all live our lives and what motivates us.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
There are so many different flavors of Christianity. I find that individuals use what many would refer to as the Zealots to represent the whole. I'm sure the media has alot to do with that. It's not the faith that is hypocritical - its the individuals.
The Zealots I find live in their own bubble, and love to spread their spiritual pixie dust all around. They also tend to be very superstitious.
If you look closely? They aren't the ones that run and manage the food panties, the safe houses for people from many ugly walks of life, work with the homeless, etc. The Zealots are the ones that tell DV victims to pray that their spouses will stop beating them, and can't come up for air that 'safety' at this point is the upmost importance. They are the ones that defend the molesters - because they wailed and repented at the alter. They tend to be afraid of anything 'secular'. Love to tell people that don't believe as they do that they are 'worldly', and all that jazz. They are also good at telling people they are bitter when in reality....they are.
At this point? Huckabee is the closest to a Zealot we have in the race. I think life and experience has woken him up a bit, but I still don't trust him as a political person. He is still Zealot lite!
To many to count don't go the Zealot route, because they like them as much as you seem too. lol! Yet, they don't make the evening news....because the media rags don't find their message as exciting.
Do some use God as part of their line as the politician? Oh yes! Others have faith, but don't have to rub people's noses in it too. Zealots don't make it to the White House, because the majority aren't Zealots. Yet, the media uses enough of them to keep things exciting. Its just one aspect of WHY the political media here has lower ratings than congress does! The news isn't the news anymore - its entertainment. The average joe isn't entertainment...but you find a nutter? You get plenty of ratings!
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Whether she wanted to believe it, didn't want to, didn't care, or whatever, she knew it was a price for following her commie loving, America hating boyfriend, and the daughter was more for public show than for any love they ever had for each other. A means to an end, and in 2008 and even now, she thinks it is her turn. Why? Because we have had what looked like (was supposed to look like) a sort of monarchical reign going on: Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton (guessing they thought Chelsea would be in there eventually!!!)
Clearly, there was reason enough to leave him on the sidelines, but the people vote for who they are told to vote for, and they like who they are told to like (Ex: FDR is still considered great by many, though he lied to the American people, and abused them!) Clinton made people feel good about their faults, because there is the Pres., and he's as bad as any of us (much worse, actually!)
You give her too much credit on all sides. Hillary could not have gotten anywhere without Bill. She likely hates him as much as any woman having to deal with marital problems has a hatred for the one they think causes the whole problem. However, she has little or nothing attractive about her (most especially the pants suits!) Further, Bill liked the women he fooled around with, and even went back for more in some cases (Gennifer, Monika, etc.) Hillary may, or may not, have been so bothered by all the trouble, but she surely didn't put it upon him to correct it.
Was a marriage of convenience all along, and she was probably incensed when he ran for and won the governorship of such a place as Arkansas. Then, she had to run interference for him constantly.
Thanks for posting that good observation!
It was HILLARY who was in charge of what they called "Bimbo Eruptions." That was not just that there were women Bill had relations with, but that, if they talked about that at all, it would hurt his political aspirations, and hers by consequence. Hillary took upon herself (and whatever team she had) to DESTROY these women, so that, if any were to talk, they were already of no character in the eyes of the public, and nothing they said would be counted worthy of print.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Bill Clinton was not what many people think of him being. His love of our country is questionable, and his love for the obvious enemies of our country was evident. He surely did not qualify to have a security clearance to read so much as the White House tour schedule, much less the secret details he saw as pres.
From December 31, 1969 to January 6, 1970, Wm.J.B. Clinton traveled to Moscow. He later stated that "relations between our two countries were pretty good then." He then described his visit as "a very friendly time, a good atmosphere." Bill Clinton claimed that was "a time of détente," but relations between the US and USSR were NOT warm. The Soviet Union was supplying advisers and anti-aircraft weapons to the North Vietnamese Communists during that time. It leaves us to wonder why they were so glad to see him, and allowed him to stay there any amount of time! (or LEAVE for that matter!)
After visiting Norway, December 12, 1969, Bill Clinton's movements and activities are unknown until he arrives in Moscow. There are a lot of questions as to who Clinton met with, and where he went during that period of almost 3 weeks. The public record reveals that Clinton’s social network and views on Vietnam were influenced by his contacts with Communist agents and sympathizers, along with his academic and political associates. Not someone we should have had in such an office of trust. This is who Hillary Rodham hitched her wagon to! This is whose coattails she decided to ride!
From December 31, 1969 to January 6, 1970, Wm.J.B. Clinton traveled to Moscow. He later stated that "relations between our two countries were pretty good then." He then described his visit as "a very friendly time, a good atmosphere." Bill Clinton claimed that was "a time of détente," but relations between the US and USSR were NOT warm. The Soviet Union was supplying advisers and anti-aircraft weapons to the North Vietnamese Communists during that time. It leaves us to wonder why they were so glad to see him, and allowed him to stay there any amount of time! (or LEAVE for that matter!)
After visiting Norway, December 12, 1969, Bill Clinton's movements and activities are unknown until he arrives in Moscow. There are a lot of questions as to who Clinton met with, and where he went during that period of almost 3 weeks. The public record reveals that Clinton’s social network and views on Vietnam were influenced by his contacts with Communist agents and sympathizers, along with his academic and political associates. Not someone we should have had in such an office of trust. This is who Hillary Rodham hitched her wagon to! This is whose coattails she decided to ride!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
