Why Hillary is STILL relevant.

Here's one "relevancy" ...

Hillary Using $800K In Campaign Funds For New Political Group

Long after the election losses.

Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton transferred just under a million dollars from her failed 2016 presidential campaign to her new political group, FEC filings show.

Hillary for America transferred $800,000 to Onward Together on May 1 — two weeks before Clinton even announced that she was launching the organization. The day after her campaign transferred the donor money to her new political organization, Clinton claimed she was now “part of the resistance” against President Trump.

a reply to: xuenchen

Keeping Hillary on ATS relevant since.....

originally posted by: DanteGaland

originally posted by: YouSir

originally posted by: DanteGaland
Only CONSERVATIVE "mainstream media" constantly brings her up.

I'd hardly call that being "relevant".

Ummm...I'm sorry...I know I loves me some ellipses...and...for all the wrong reasons...

but your preferred method of writing makes my brain hurt...

There must be some underlying psychological reason for the sheer unwillingness to proceed that overwhelms my mind whenever I attempt to read your schtick...but there it is...nevertheless...

YouSir

And YET you seem to feel obligated to comment and REPLY.

That. Sir. SEEMS to me to also hint at some underlying psychology...

Ummm...indeed...much related to a Darwinian fight or flight mechanism...the wingless variety...

Compulsive...yet obligation free...





YouSir

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Deflection.

Whataboutisms.

Projection.

And nothing of substance to talk about.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Deflection.

Whataboutisms.

Projection.

And nothing of substance to talk about.

it's rather simple. Hillary is permanently linked to the Democrat Party. The 'Party' does nothing to distance themselves from her. The MSM feeds that.

The perception with a large percentage of the voters is Hillary typifies D.C. corruption.

The Republicans will play on that until she meets her maker. period. The point of the thread is the Democrat party and the MSM is equally, if not more, culpable than the Republicans or Trump for any continued relevancy.

That seems the reality of it. It is what it is.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
The point of the thread is the Democrat party and the MSM is equally, if not more, culpable than the Republicans or Trump.

Yeah. The finger pointing never gets old. @@

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: face23785

Furthermore there was nothing sensitive in any of those emails so the "she screwed up" excuse can still float.

This is flat out false. Directly from Comey's statement, emphasis added:

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information AT THE TIME THEY WERE SENT OR RECEIVED. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

Part of the training you get is recognizing what material is classified and what isn't, even if it doesn't contain the header. A first year Army private with a Secret clearance would know this. For someone with Clinton's experience, having held a Top Secret clearance when she was on the Senate Intel Committee, to suggest that the header was the key factor is dishonest. She was just taking advantage of the fact that to most of the public, that would sound legit. Anyone who has had classified training knew she was lying there. And the 2,000 additional emails that were up-classified after the fact, I can tell you from personal experience that someone with her level of involvement with classified material over the years would have an excellent sense of when something is probably going to be classified in the future.

It's also a huge violation of the federal records act for her and her lawyers to be deciding what's work related and what's not, which is part of the entire reason why you're not supposed to do official business through private email. By rights your entire private email account becomes government property, and they decide what's work related and what's not. There are even warnings when you log onto a government computer that any information that passes through this computer becomes government property, whether it's official business or just emailing your yoga routine to someone. That's likely the entire reason why she set up the private server in the first place, so she could circumvent that system. (This and only this is speculation on my part, everything else I've said here is not a matter of opinion.)

The entire defense is based upon the average citizen simply not knowing about any of this stuff, and people like you who apparently refuse to be educated on the subject from people who do know. You have been misled. I've tried to help you out. Only you can force yourself to remain ignorant on this issue. If you want to be informed, the information is there. It's up to you.

Did you know back during her tenure the Drone programs were classified? An example from my time in the Air Force, had I shared a New York Times article about the drone program I would have been sharing highly classified information from another agency. This is how broken the classification system was and still is to this day. Without knowing what the information was that was "shared" we cant even begin to make a call about how bad it was.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: nwtrucker
The point of the thread is the Democrat party and the MSM is equally, if not more, culpable than the Republicans or Trump.

Yeah. The finger pointing never gets old. @@

Of course! Did you expect anything else???

a reply to: nwtrucker

If Hillary is indicted it will be an indictment of the entire Demorat Party; their Deep State operatives and the CIA/Alinsky tactics which they embrace.

...

originally posted by: fnpmitchreturns
a reply to: nwtrucker

If Hillary is indicted it will be an indictment of the entire Demorat Party; their Deep State operatives and the CIA/Alinsky tactics which they embrace.

...

she recently killed fats domino, katie lee and abubakari yakubu, someone needs to put an end to it.

a reply to: nwtrucker

wrong! hilary is about as relevant as paris hilton's genital warts

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: nwtrucker

wrong! hilary is about as relevant as paris hilton's genital warts

You wish....

I don't get why Hillary Clinton is still relevant.... So let me start a thread to bash Hillary Clinton for multiple pages..

The cognitive dissonance is astounding...

But but but but Hillary Clinton

a reply to: nwtrucker

Hillary is only relevant to people that are irrelevant!

At this point what difference does she make?

originally posted by: GD21D
I don't get why Hillary Clinton is still relevant.... So let me start a thread to bash Hillary Clinton for multiple pages..

The cognitive dissonance is astounding...

But but but but Hillary Clinton

I suspect the term 'cognitive dissonance' is used by those either incapable of or avoiding at all costs seeing anything outside their own comfort zone.

I couldn't care less about Hillary. I do care about the direction and overall survival of the U.S.. Hillary does represent the utter corruption of Wash. D.C. politics, in both parties. That's the perception that the left faces.

If Hillary is so 'irrelevant', why hasn't the left thrown her under the bus yet? Why does the MSM cover every inane comment the lady makes without contradiction or comment?

I can speculate on the reasons. Perhaps no one to replace/take over from her reins. Perhaps the collateral damage incurred by the Democrat Party in distancing themselves from her....to wit: the Bernie Saunders fiasco and the internal corruption that would be even further exposed.

Perhaps the collateral damage suffered by all TPTB that also have 'Foundations' and would suffer equally if the Clinton Foundation was fully exposed. Equal damage to Republican interests if this had been addressed earlier, by them?

Perhaps and over ringing endorsement for Donald Trump as proof positive and the resultant disaffection of things political in D.C. ensuring his re-election...

You tell me why she relevant and why both parties and the MSM keep so.

She is relevant, no matter what the left posts.

Like an abscessed tooth. It and she just won't go away without surgery...

a reply to: nwtrucker

I don't know. I think the party in the majority has a lot to do with the direction of the country. Laws, wars, things like that.

But ATS wants to talk and monitor old gossip and people who do not effect my life anymore. I think it's about done here.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: nwtrucker

I don't know. I think the party in the majority has a lot to do with the direction of the country. Laws, wars, things like that.

But ATS wants to talk and monitor old gossip and people who do not effect my life anymore. I think it's about done here.

Some truth in that. The party in power isn't that much different than the last one. It certainly doesn't control the MSM, either. Sometimes I think the 'party in power listens to the MSM almost as much as the Dems.

I'd say some truth in each. (I'm no fan of the party in power.)

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: nwtrucker

I don't know. I think the party in the majority has a lot to do with the direction of the country. Laws, wars, things like that.

But ATS wants to talk and monitor old gossip and people who do not effect my life anymore. I think it's about done here.

Well now maybe not just yet....considering the events of today, more relevant than ever??

a reply to: nwtrucker

Which one? I'm waiting for Sessions to get indicted before Hillary.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: nwtrucker

Which one? I'm waiting for Sessions to get indicted before Hillary.

Lord, I'd love it, whoever is first!