Hillary is Gone

[iamwhatiseem]

Or, just perhaps, when looking at a former secretary of state's job performance, screwing up in Benghazi doesn't totally wash away her success in rebuilding the bridges BushII burned with our allies. And, just perhaps, after seeing over a decade of idiot witch hunts over failed real estate deals, fantasies of assassinated campaign staff, politicians getting bjs and smoking pot in the 60s, sane people don't blame her from protecting herself from crazies.

And there you have it.
See what I mean? It means nothing to them. Accountability is meaningless. Transparency is only for those who you disagree with.
When someone you support does something wrong, no matter, simply think of something someone you do not support did worse and you will feel better.
Hillary will not be harmed in any way by this. In fact, any criticism she receives only serves to strengthen her support.
Same for Obama. Same for Hillary.

Not at all. She succeeded in working in the senate across lines. Overall, her time at State was effective. It's not about ignoring accountability; it's about not allowing right wing nutters to pull things out of context, esp when they are meaningless things. There's no doubt we shoud have not have had an ambassador actually hands on in aiding rebel groups, and he should have been in the embassy rather than out at night. Hillary's answered that. Move on.

Thanks, you are quite helpful in making my point.
I said accountability is meaningless, and you say "especially when they are meaningless".
A Secy State using a private server for her email is hands down unacceptable.
Do you understand/know what a private server is?
If you are using gmail for instance, or any other email provided to you by anyone private or your work - YOU cannot edit past emails. You cannot delete emails, you can delete them from what YOU see, but depending on how the provider has it set up - the emails still remain ON THE SERVER.
The government purposefully sets up their email servers to automatically archive all emails, since it is public record.
By Hillary using her own server, the government has no access to it. None.
She can delete/edit past emails, and has full control of what she "turns in" to the government to archive.
And THAT is not meaningless. It is dead wrong.

 

[bendog]

Or, just perhaps, when looking at a former secretary of state's job performance, screwing up in Benghazi doesn't totally wash away her success in rebuilding the bridges BushII burned with our allies. And, just perhaps, after seeing over a decade of idiot witch hunts over failed real estate deals, fantasies of assassinated campaign staff, politicians getting bjs and smoking pot in the 60s, sane people don't blame her from protecting herself from crazies.

And there you have it.
See what I mean? It means nothing to them. Accountability is meaningless. Transparency is only for those who you disagree with.
When someone you support does something wrong, no matter, simply think of something someone you do not support did worse and you will feel better.
Hillary will not be harmed in any way by this. In fact, any criticism she receives only serves to strengthen her support.
Same for Obama. Same for Hillary.

Not at all. She succeeded in working in the senate across lines. Overall, her time at State was effective. It's not about ignoring accountability; it's about not allowing right wing nutters to pull things out of context, esp when they are meaningless things. There's no doubt we shoud have not have had an ambassador actually hands on in aiding rebel groups, and he should have been in the embassy rather than out at night. Hillary's answered that. Move on.

Thanks, you are quite helpful in making my point.
I said accountability is meaningless, and you say "especially when they are meaningless".
A Secy State using a private server for her email is hands down unacceptable.
Do you understand/know what a private server is?
If you are using gmail for instance, or any other email provided to you by anyone private or your work - YOU cannot edit past emails. You cannot delete emails, you can delete them from what YOU see, but depending on how the provider has it set up - the emails still remain ON THE SERVER.
The government purposefully sets up their email servers to automatically archive all emails, since it is public record.
By Hillary using her own server, the government has no access to it. None.
She can delete/edit past emails, and has full control of what she "turns in" to the government to archive.
And THAT is not meaningless. It is dead wrong.

Well, now, I believe you are switching horses after the Benghazi one died of exhaustion. I agree it was wrong for her to use a private server. But, first of all, not all govt official emails are 'public record.' So, to the extent you think you have a right to read all her emails ... take a deep breath and rethink.

But again, you choose to define accountability to reach your own predetermined conclusion that this disqualifies Hillary from being potus, and all those (a majority most likely) who think it's more a tempest in a teapot, or a spot on a dress, are mere trolls for chosing not to follow blindly down your partisan alley.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Or, just perhaps, when looking at a former secretary of state's job performance, screwing up in Benghazi doesn't totally wash away her success in rebuilding the bridges BushII burned with our allies. And, just perhaps, after seeing over a decade of idiot witch hunts over failed real estate deals, fantasies of assassinated campaign staff, politicians getting bjs and smoking pot in the 60s, sane people don't blame her from protecting herself from crazies.

And there you have it.
See what I mean? It means nothing to them. Accountability is meaningless. Transparency is only for those who you disagree with.
When someone you support does something wrong, no matter, simply think of something someone you do not support did worse and you will feel better.
Hillary will not be harmed in any way by this. In fact, any criticism she receives only serves to strengthen her support.
Same for Obama. Same for Hillary.

Not at all. She succeeded in working in the senate across lines. Overall, her time at State was effective. It's not about ignoring accountability; it's about not allowing right wing nutters to pull things out of context, esp when they are meaningless things. There's no doubt we shoud have not have had an ambassador actually hands on in aiding rebel groups, and he should have been in the embassy rather than out at night. Hillary's answered that. Move on.

Thanks, you are quite helpful in making my point.
I said accountability is meaningless, and you say "especially when they are meaningless".
A Secy State using a private server for her email is hands down unacceptable.
Do you understand/know what a private server is?
If you are using gmail for instance, or any other email provided to you by anyone private or your work - YOU cannot edit past emails. You cannot delete emails, you can delete them from what YOU see, but depending on how the provider has it set up - the emails still remain ON THE SERVER.
The government purposefully sets up their email servers to automatically archive all emails, since it is public record.
By Hillary using her own server, the government has no access to it. None.
She can delete/edit past emails, and has full control of what she "turns in" to the government to archive.
And THAT is not meaningless. It is dead wrong.

Well, now, I believe you are switching horses after the Benghazi one died of exhaustion. I agree it was wrong for her to use a private server. But, first of all, not all govt official emails are 'public record.' So, to the extent you think you have a right to read all her emails ... take a deep breath and rethink.

But again, you choose to define accountability to reach your own predetermined conclusion that this disqualifies Hillary from being potus, and all those (a majority most likely) who think it's more a tempest in a teapot, or a spot on a dress, are mere trolls for chosing not to follow blindly down your partisan alley.

Where did I say this disqualifies her to be President?
Where did I say anyone can read her emails? That would be insane.

What I did say, is that by using a private server - SHE controls what gets archived and what doesn't. SHE decides what is important, and what isn't.
SHE can delete any email she wants, for any reason - and absolutely no one would ever know. Ever.
You want to trust all politicians to have this ability?
She wasn't some mid-lever bureaucrat. She was the Secretary of State.
This is a big deal. This is not a small matter to scoff off and shrug your shoulders too.

 

[NoNukes]

If Hillary had went up to that microphone and announced she had murdered Foster and that she had 20 million dollars placed in her account from ISIS there are still many that would vote for her because she is a woman and many feel that Affirmative action applies to the Oval Office. This email thing will have the Democrats beating the bushes looking for another female. Elizabeth Warren could easily be there new choice as she is a female and an American Indian....right!

We will vote for her just to piss you off.

 

[Gracie]

The Facts





Warren’s Lineage

Warren has claimed Cherokee and Delaware Indian heritage, but the only proof so far seems to be stories she says she heard from family members as a child. Cherokee groups have demanded documentation of the candidate’s Native American ancestry, but she hasn’t delivered.

misreported this information, saying that the genealogical society had found the marriage license itself and debunked the notion that Warren lied about her lineage. The paper later acknowledged its mistake in a correction notice.

The author of the family newsletter said she didn’t have documentation of the marriage-license application and she doesn’t know who sent her the reference.

(Indian Country Today Media Network has posted the family newsletter on its Web site).

The New England genealogical society clarified in a statement that it has found no proof of Warren’s self-proclaimed Native American lineage. The group also told The Globe that the candidate’s family is not listed in an early-20th century census of major tribes, known as the Dawes Rolls.

An article in Atlantic magazine pointed out that Warren “would not be eligible to become a member of any of the three federally recognized Cherokee tribes based on the evidence so far surfaced by independent genealogists about her ancestry.” That’s because her Cherokee ancestors, if she has any, would either be too distant or they never documented their ties in ways that meet the tribes’ requirements.

Obviously, this doesn’t preclude Warren from having traces of Native American heritage.



Family Tales

What about the stories that Warren claims to have heard from her family? The Globe interviewed an extensive list of the professor’s relatives, who had conflicting memories. Some recalled stories of Indian ancestors, others did not.

One second cousin told the Globe that her grandmother had said that her father — one of Warren’s relatives — was part Delaware Indian. But the cousin’s mother, who did not approve of Native Americans, had always denied that claim, according to the Globe.

Warren’s siblings have all backed up the candidate’s statements. One brother told the Globe that his grandparents explained to him, after much pleading to get answers as a child, that “your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee,” according to the Globe.

But the Globe also noted that some of Warren’s cousins “say they know nothing of Native American blood in the family.”

Warren explained how she learned about her Indian lineage for a profile in The New Yorker. The professor-turned-politician said her parents had eloped, and she had always wondered why. Over the years, she said, the story emerged that “my parents were very much in love, they wanted to get married, and my father’s mother and father said, ‘No. You cannot marry her, because she is part Cherokee and part Delaware.’”

Undocumented claims of Native American ancestry, especially those based on family lore, are not uncommon in this country. That’s especially true in places like Oklahoma, which ranks second in the U.S. in number of Native American residents and third in percentage of population of that descent, according to U.S. Census data.

Warren contributed recipes to a Native American cookbook called “Pow Wow Chow,” published in 1984 by the Five Civilized Tribes Museum in Muskogee, Okla. She signed her entries “Elizabeth Warren -- Cherokee.”

Did Elizabeth Warren check the Native American box when she applied to Harvard and Penn - The Washington Post

 

[bendog]

Or, just perhaps, when looking at a former secretary of state's job performance, screwing up in Benghazi doesn't totally wash away her success in rebuilding the bridges BushII burned with our allies. And, just perhaps, after seeing over a decade of idiot witch hunts over failed real estate deals, fantasies of assassinated campaign staff, politicians getting bjs and smoking pot in the 60s, sane people don't blame her from protecting herself from crazies.

And there you have it.
See what I mean? It means nothing to them. Accountability is meaningless. Transparency is only for those who you disagree with.
When someone you support does something wrong, no matter, simply think of something someone you do not support did worse and you will feel better.
Hillary will not be harmed in any way by this. In fact, any criticism she receives only serves to strengthen her support.
Same for Obama. Same for Hillary.

Not at all. She succeeded in working in the senate across lines. Overall, her time at State was effective. It's not about ignoring accountability; it's about not allowing right wing nutters to pull things out of context, esp when they are meaningless things. There's no doubt we shoud have not have had an ambassador actually hands on in aiding rebel groups, and he should have been in the embassy rather than out at night. Hillary's answered that. Move on.

Thanks, you are quite helpful in making my point.
I said accountability is meaningless, and you say "especially when they are meaningless".
A Secy State using a private server for her email is hands down unacceptable.
Do you understand/know what a private server is?
If you are using gmail for instance, or any other email provided to you by anyone private or your work - YOU cannot edit past emails. You cannot delete emails, you can delete them from what YOU see, but depending on how the provider has it set up - the emails still remain ON THE SERVER.
The government purposefully sets up their email servers to automatically archive all emails, since it is public record.
By Hillary using her own server, the government has no access to it. None.
She can delete/edit past emails, and has full control of what she "turns in" to the government to archive.
And THAT is not meaningless. It is dead wrong.

Well, now, I believe you are switching horses after the Benghazi one died of exhaustion. I agree it was wrong for her to use a private server. But, first of all, not all govt official emails are 'public record.' So, to the extent you think you have a right to read all her emails ... take a deep breath and rethink.

But again, you choose to define accountability to reach your own predetermined conclusion that this disqualifies Hillary from being potus, and all those (a majority most likely) who think it's more a tempest in a teapot, or a spot on a dress, are mere trolls for chosing not to follow blindly down your partisan alley.

Where did I say this disqualifies her to be President?
Where did I say anyone can read her emails? That would be insane.

What I did say, is that by using a private server - SHE controls what gets archived and what doesn't. SHE decides what is important, and what isn't.
SHE can delete any email she wants, for any reason - and absolutely no one would ever know. Ever.
You want to trust all politicians to have this ability?
She wasn't some mid-lever bureaucrat. She was the Secretary of State.
This is a big deal. This is not a small matter to scoff off and shrug your shoulders too.

If I didn't vote for politicians I find distrustful, I'd never vote.

 

[Gracie]

Senator Elizabeth Warren lives in a $5.4-million-dollar mansion, claimed "Native American" status, to score a Harvard teaching gig paying $350,000 to teach one class, and now lectures us that "the system is rigged to benefit the rich." Is the part about her house and teaching true?
Read more at snopes.com Elizabeth Warren Wealthy Native American

 

[Gracie]

Elizabeth Warren Is Part Native American Mother Jones

 

[bendog]

Elizabeth Warren Is Part Native American Mother Jones

Great. We gopers can't even find a black or latin who's not bat shite crazy, and now the dems got themselves a Native American.

 

[g5000]

I looked outside and the sun is still covered in ash, the moon is still red, dogs are still sleeping with cats, Bill O'Reilly is still in combat mode, and the fish all have three heads. Plus, someone farted in the elevator.

This is how I know Hillary is not gone.

 

[Gracie]

The point about Warren is...and which keeps picking at my mind is....IF she is not a minority and LIED, what is she going to lie about on other things? And IF she is "part" NA due to great great great grandparents, that is not even enough to get benefits NA's give. Which means she will go to any length to find a loophole that benefits HERSELF. Pretty sure I don't like sneaks. And she is sneaky.

 

[Borillar]

The point about Warren is...and which keeps picking at my mind is....IF she is not a minority and LIED, what is she going to lie about on other things? And IF she is "part" NA due to great great great grandparents, that is not even enough to get benefits NA's give. Which means she will go to any length to find a loophole that benefits HERSELF. Pretty sure I don't like sneaks. And she is sneaky.

I can agree that a person seeking benefits due a certain group should have to be able to prove an association with that group. If these allegations against Warren are true, I couldn't support her.

 

[bendog]

The point about Warren is...and which keeps picking at my mind is....IF she is not a minority and LIED, what is she going to lie about on other things? And IF she is "part" NA due to great great great grandparents, that is not even enough to get benefits NA's give. Which means she will go to any length to find a loophole that benefits HERSELF. Pretty sure I don't like sneaks. And she is sneaky.

I can agree that a person seeking benefits due a certain group should have to be able to prove an association with that group. If these allegations against Warren are true, I couldn't support her.

She did not seek benefits.

 

[Gracie]

The point about Warren is...and which keeps picking at my mind is....IF she is not a minority and LIED, what is she going to lie about on other things? And IF she is "part" NA due to great great great grandparents, that is not even enough to get benefits NA's give. Which means she will go to any length to find a loophole that benefits HERSELF. Pretty sure I don't like sneaks. And she is sneaky.

I can agree that a person seeking benefits due a certain group should have to be able to prove an association with that group. If these allegations against Warren are true, I couldn't support her.

She did not seek benefits.

She got benefits by putting herself as a minority and getting a gig due to that claim.

 

[Siete]

The point about Warren is...and which keeps picking at my mind is....IF she is not a minority and LIED, what is she going to lie about on other things? And IF she is "part" NA due to great great great grandparents, that is not even enough to get benefits NA's give. Which means she will go to any length to find a loophole that benefits HERSELF. Pretty sure I don't like sneaks. And she is sneaky.

I can agree that a person seeking benefits due a certain group should have to be able to prove an association with that group. If these allegations against Warren are true, I couldn't support her.

She did not seek benefits.

She got benefits by putting herself as a minority and getting a gig due to that claim.

a Democrat who caters to minorities ... Damn, imagine that. No doubt the RW is so shocked ..

 

[Gracie]

A democrat that maybe lied since the NA are questioning her claims and STILL have not received proof she has NA blood in her but STILL claimed the benefits as NA. Pretty sure many are shocked...and not just RW either.

 

[Siete]

A democrat that maybe lied since the NA are questioning her claims and STILL have not received proof she has NA blood in her but STILL claimed the benefits as NA. Pretty sure many are shocked...and not just RW either.

pretty sure if non issues remain the front line vs actual voter concerns, whoever keeps carping about them will lose the next general election ... no, in fact I'm dead sure. Take the Republicans for instance.

Losers.

top 10 voter concerns

1

Economy

• 2
  
  Health care

• 3
  
  National debt

• 4
  
  Education

• 5
  
  Taxes

• 6
  
  Help the middle class

• 7
  
  Government reform

• 8
  
  Energy & environment

• 9
  
  State of politics

• 10
  
  Social security

damn, no Benghazi, Emails, or any of the other BS topics RW's yammer constantly about.

did I mention RW LOSERS ?

 

[rightwinger]

This "scandal" will have all the impact of Whiitewater

All it needs is a seven year GOP witch hunt

 

[g5000]

The point about Warren is...and which keeps picking at my mind is....IF she is not a minority and LIED, what is she going to lie about on other things? And IF she is "part" NA due to great great great grandparents, that is not even enough to get benefits NA's give. Which means she will go to any length to find a loophole that benefits HERSELF. Pretty sure I don't like sneaks. And she is sneaky.

She didn't lie. Someone in her family told her she had Cherokee blood and she took her family member's word for it.

She simply believed her family member and repeated what she had been told.

Sort of like the parrots around here who regurgitate the lies fed to them.

 

[Siete]

if the RW's could learn to regift their ass they'd be all set for xmas !