It should prevent her from becoming president, but if that's the only reason it would show how much more fundamental trouble we are in. The country should be able to see the reasons for rejecting her socialist statism with or without the long list of specific scandals and corruption. If she were to lose only over some concrete scandal it would mean that the voters didn't get the point and we have to start over with the next version with no progress made -- possibly as soon as this upcoming election. If the scandals and dishonesty do her in, we'll take it, but it's not enough.

Which is definitely part of the problem. So when a terrorist blows up a bunch of people in Time Square with a nail bomb, what will they say then, the people in TS deserved it, because they participated in trampling on some idiots rights to kill others? This BS from them to justify every bit of illegal activity is everywhere's now, from the Justice Depart, the IRS, the EPA, and more. This is what give Trump the reach he has, as well as neuters the Republicrats who just stand there and bleat about dumb ass things like abortion and "christian" values. What happened to "an eye for an eye" value? These criminals just keep slithering away.

Thor, I am right with you, though not so restrained. This is accelerating to need to scrap the whole thing and start over time.

Thor, I am right with you, though not so restrained. This is accelerating to need to scrap the whole thing and start over time.

Here it is, NYT again:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/...

His examples include a free-trade agreement in Colombia that benefited a major foundation donor’s natural resource investments in the South American nation, development projects in the aftermath of the Haitian earthquake in 2010, and more than $1 million in payments to Mr. Clinton by a Canadian bank and major shareholder in the Keystone XL oil pipeline around the time the project was being debated in the State Department.

And the typical lying BS from the Dumbocraps:
Conservative “super PACs” plan to seize on “Clinton Cash,” and a pro-Democrat super PAC has already assembled a dossier on Mr. Schweizer, a speechwriting consultant to former President George W. Bush and a fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution who has contributed to the conservative website Breitbart.com, to make the case that he has a bias against Mrs. Clinton.

And the newly assembled Clinton campaign team is planning a full-court press to diminish the book as yet another conservative hit job.

A campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, called the book part of the Republicans’ coordinated attack strategy on Mrs. Clinton “twisting previously known facts into absurd conspiracy theories,” and he said “it will not be the first work of partisan-fueled fiction about the Clintons’ record, and we know it will not be the last.”

Where are the investigations into all this crap? By the time they get around to it, the servers are wiped, the witnesses all have amnesia or are dead and the Beast is in the WH. This has become so blatant with the Obamanation Administration, I think the dictatorship is here and the Sheeple just haven't caught up to it. All there is to oppose the takeover has been huge amounts of gas from the right wing gasbag collection in the media and congress.

Assertions are true or false. The assertion that the article is about "this is a scandal because I say it is" is false.

If you don't see news reports for months reporting the corruption then that is your fault. It doesn't turn a straightforward article referring to what she did and the FBI investigation into "reaching" as if "her critics" "have nothing" and are "reaching far to find something to criticize". No one has to "reach far" to criticize and denounce Hillary Clinton.

You also need to add that the dude who bought those rights donated a small amount (about 500K) to the Clinton Foundation, upon approval. There was a guy who wrote a book about this (I wish I could find it) that outlined a huge number of the same things. I also posted the IBD editorial that claims she only had the private server so she could hide the emails back and forth for each of these deals. Is that too hard to believe about this weasel? She needs to go to jail forever....

"Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton"

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/...

I agree ,100%. She is an evil and manipulative bought and paid for woman

My friend, it is very true. Three security infractions and you are fired from General Dynamics. We had a guy brought to court by DSS for a hearing for two infractions in one year.

One can say the limits are changing/overboard, but who sets the limits? The agencies. Definitely not some GS 14! Regardless, her behavior is aggreegious. You could not avoid prosecution if you did it.

The "other guys did it too" regarding servers is 1) a lame, irrelevant argument, and 2) a lie! Earlier Sec States used personal email addresses for personal emails and some fringe work emails. The ONLY examples of classification issues are from post-elevation of the classification level, where it was changed after the email was sent, generally after they left office. This is not a valid argument.

Hillary is a nasty, self-interested (in a one step ahead, non objective way), oligarchican. She considers the rules for others. She killed an ambassador and support staff. Just a nasty person.

I do not think Trump is smart enough to be this bad.

Uranium to Kazakhstan? Really?

Thor, this is deeper than that, but she did violate security rules over and over, and she used the private server to sell our country to the highest donator to her foundation. This is not news, she sold 50% of the US uranium supply to some rich dude in Kazakhstan (or one of the stans). She is a whore for herself. About as disgusting an example of a politician slug that has yet crawled the earth.

See the link I posted, they followed up with what she had on her little machine and why she had it there. When you are coercing money from foreign sources in exchange for better treatment by the department you run, you do not want it on the government server, someone might see it and object.

You get the government you vote for. Don't vote for this Beast.

Something that needs to be pruned way back.

And the media is now leaking she will. The fix is in...

Look at the link I posted above where they identified on IBD just what the reason was behinf the whole private server thing. It is the same thing that the guy who was on Fox presented and wrote the book about. All the deals she made that resulted in mysterious giant donations to the Clinton Foundation. They need to go arrest the whole lot of them.

Nope, a lot of the media drivel points to the fact they have already loaded the dice and she is going to get off free and clear. The fix is in....

This one here is even more damning, I would say it is a good list of both unethical and indictable offenses:

http://www.investors.com/politics/edi...

Any person who is not a political appointee would be instantly fired and never allowed a clearance again. I have had such a clearance, and knowledge of this fact is part of the first minute of required training in order to obtain such a clearance.

Now with regard to political appointees, sometimes political appointees have a chip in the grand political game that they can cash in at any time. For an example, see the following clip from Clear and Present Danger regarding the Potomac Two-Step:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWwN-...

"any normal person would be instantly fired and never allowed a clearance again"
Is this actually true? I've heard it's common practice of officials to use their own e-mail systems. I've also heard the information was not classified at the time she received it.

I think we're overboard about classifying stuff, not to protect US secrets, but to protect officials from people learning about unpopular or questionable actions they take.

I suspect the reason they use their own e-mail service is they reason e-mail is more akin to a phone call and they don't want every word they utter publicized. The truth is they don't want the public looking over their shoulder while they do their job. I am not saying I agree with that they should have private e-mails. The existence of them makes me wonder what they have to hide. But unless there's evidence she was using the private e-mail to hide illegal activities, I consider it a nothingburger.

You've got to be kidding that there is not overwhelming evidence that what she did was 1) wrong and 2) illegal. She clearly e-mailed classified data on an inappropriately secured system. With a few instances, any normal person would be instantly fired and never allowed a clearance again. With as many as she had, any normal person would go to jail, period. This is not even debatable.
Begging the question? Come on.

"IBD is more libertarian than "far right wing". "
I was more liberal and less libertarian when I last read IBD 15 years ago, so I may have a different perspective if I read it now. It could have changed too.

I don't detect a bias in WSJ, which is exactly what I want-- the facts, not someone starting with a desired answer and then looking for facts. That's the whole reason scientific studies are blinded. We want the truth, despite human frailty. The WSJ op-ed page, though, last I read it a few years ago, did not seem at all afraid to publish potentially offensive opinions.