HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Jane Sanders to FBI: Ge...

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:12 PM

 

Jane Sanders to FBI: Get the lead out on its Clinton e-mail investigation

POLITICO
Jane Sanders to FBI: Get on with Clinton email probe
By Nick Gass
04/29/16


The FBI should get the lead out on its investigation over Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her time as secretary of state, Jane Sanders said Thursday.

During an interview with Neil Cavuto aired Thursday on Fox Business, the wife of Bernie Sanders and one of his closest political advisers also said that the campaign would continue to draw distinctions with Clinton on policy issues and not personal affairs.

Sanders noted that her husband's campaign has said as much from the very beginning of the campaign, particularly after he remarked during the first Democratic debate that the American people are "sick of hearing about your damn emails."

But Jane Sanders also noted that the Democratic candidate said there was a process, remarking that the FBI investigation is going forward.

"We want to let it go through without politicizing it, and then we’ll find out what the situation is. And that’s how we still feel," Sanders said. "I mean, it would be nice if the FBI moved it along," she added, with a laugh.



"it would be nice if the FBI moved it along," Jane Sanders says of the probe into Hillary Clinton's private email. |

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/04/jane-sanders-hillary-clinton-fbi-222624


117 replies, 4382 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 117 replies Author Time Post
Reply Jane Sanders to FBI: Get the lead out on its Clinton e-mail investigation (Original post)
imagine2015 Apr 2016 OP
CorkySt.Clair Apr 2016 #1
NWCorona Apr 2016 #3
CorkySt.Clair Apr 2016 #5
NWCorona Apr 2016 #33
Baobab Apr 2016 #83
Post removed Apr 2016 #6
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #10
synergie Apr 2016 #27
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #78
synergie Apr 2016 #84
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #109
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #35
silvershadow Apr 2016 #76
synergie Apr 2016 #85
silvershadow Apr 2016 #86
synergie Apr 2016 #94
silvershadow Apr 2016 #96
floppyboo May 2016 #115
COLGATE4 May 2016 #99
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #110
workinclasszero Apr 2016 #18
ViseGrip Apr 2016 #21
workinclasszero Apr 2016 #25
Post removed Apr 2016 #30
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #37
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #41
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #48
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #71
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #73
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #75
COLGATE4 May 2016 #100
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #111
Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #19
Beacool Apr 2016 #87
Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #91
Beacool Apr 2016 #92
NWCorona Apr 2016 #2
ViseGrip Apr 2016 #22
synergie Apr 2016 #28
NWCorona Apr 2016 #34
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #40
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #38
Andy823 Apr 2016 #50
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #54
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #4
tularetom Apr 2016 #8
BootinUp Apr 2016 #14
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #43
BootinUp Apr 2016 #55
workinclasszero Apr 2016 #7
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #13
George II Apr 2016 #9
Skink Apr 2016 #11
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #31
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #39
seabeyond Apr 2016 #12
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #15
seabeyond Apr 2016 #20
BootinUp Apr 2016 #16
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #45
Bob41213 May 2016 #102
Zynx Apr 2016 #17
felix_numinous Apr 2016 #23
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #42
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #47
Tarc Apr 2016 #24
BuddhaGirl Apr 2016 #57
imagine2015 May 2016 #103
Tarc May 2016 #117
Kalidurga Apr 2016 #26
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #49
Kalidurga Apr 2016 #58
Rosa Luxemburg Apr 2016 #29
dubyadiprecession Apr 2016 #32
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #59
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #36
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #44
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #51
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #53
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #62
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #70
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #72
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #74
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #77
COLGATE4 May 2016 #98
Vinca Apr 2016 #46
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #60
Buzz cook May 2016 #106
Vinca May 2016 #107
Buzz cook May 2016 #112
Vinca May 2016 #114
libdem4life Apr 2016 #52
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #63
libdem4life Apr 2016 #66
killbotfactory Apr 2016 #56
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #64
killbotfactory Apr 2016 #67
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #80
840high Apr 2016 #68
-none Apr 2016 #69
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #81
-none Apr 2016 #93
RandySF Apr 2016 #61
Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #65
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #79
pdsimdars Apr 2016 #82
Demsrule86 Apr 2016 #89
Punkingal Apr 2016 #97
Beacool Apr 2016 #88
Yavin4 Apr 2016 #90
imagine2015 May 2016 #104
brooklynite May 2016 #116
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2016 #95
AgerolanAmerican May 2016 #101
2banon May 2016 #105
Hekate May 2016 #108
senz May 2016 #113

Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:18 PM

1. Awww

 

Poor Jane thought she was going to the White House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:19 PM

3. And still just might.

Hillary doesn't have a lock either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #3)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:22 PM

5. Thanks for that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:54 PM

33. It didn't work out to well for that guy nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #33)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:04 PM

83. I would not be surprised if they take their time.

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #1)


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:31 PM

10. "Poor Jane"???? As opposed to multi-millionaire Hillary.

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:35 PM

27. Well, we do not know, their refusal to actually release their tax records

 

Means that we do not know how many millions Jane and her hubby have. Poor Jane can't be bothered to follow the financial disclosures expected of Senators and presidential candidates, simply because she is worried that people might go through their papers and ask questions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to synergie (Reply #27)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:16 PM

78. I know. And so do you. But fling more mud if that's the best you can do.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Reply #78)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:32 PM

84. You don't know and neither do I, because it's simple fact that they have not been transparent

 

or honest about their responsibilities here. Slinging mud is what Jane and Bernie and their supporters have been doing. Attacking me personally for pointing out that they have NOT released their financial disclosures in an open or honest manner is actual mud slinging.

You don't know anything about the Sander's financial status because they refuse to tell you the truth, i know that you don't seem to be able to acknowledge that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to synergie (Reply #27)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:37 PM

109. Nice whisle right there

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:59 PM

35. It's more millionaire Jane v multimillionaire Hillary. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #35)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:14 PM

76. Jane is a millionaire? News to me. Hillary is a multi-milionarie x at least 150. If Jane

 

and Bernie have even cracked a single million that would be news to me. If that's the sole argument, then we'd all better just stay home, because there's not a candidate in the race that fits those restrictions. ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to silvershadow (Reply #76)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:37 PM

85. Anything about their finances woudl be news to us all, since Bernie and Jane refuse to release their

 

records, they've cracked a few millions, just in their real estate holdings, the 200k salaries and the financial nepotism they practice.

The sole argument here is that they are deliberately dishonest and fail to keep their word or follow the rules, about financial disclosures. Bernie is a hypocrite, Jane is outright lying. Stay home if your purity tests matter so much because Bernie and Jane fail their own purity tests. Or you can vote for the candidate that's actually been honest and transparent here, in the manner that ALL candidates for office have been asked to be.

Bernie won't follow the rules, but he makes up new ones for Hillary. Jane has said that she's worried that people will do what they have done with Hillary, look into their records and ask questions, which is why she refuses to do what she promised to do, and which presidential candidates are expected to do, release their tax records, ALL of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to synergie (Reply #85)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:41 PM

86. transcripts? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to silvershadow (Reply #86)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 05:37 PM

94. Sure, why not have all the candiates release their paid speech transcripts?

 

For their entire political history? I'm curious what Bernie was saying to the Irish Republican Army, Oretga etc.

But since that's something that literally no one has EVER asked ANY candidate for EVER, how about we get the tax records out first, you know those things we actually ask of elected offiicials and presidential candidates?

That way, we can see which things Bernie got paid for over the years, and can do what Bernie has done and ask specifically how his contributions relate to his votes.

Why are you guys so eager to let him continue violating his own standards on transparency and honesty? Is it okay to lie and conceal his own financial interests because he's the great Bernie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to synergie (Reply #94)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 05:39 PM

96. They have. Except one. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to synergie (Reply #94)

Sun May 1, 2016, 03:42 PM

115. That's kooky! I never knew the IRA and the Sandanista's paid for Sanders' speeches! Wow!

Must be some powerful international figure - oh wait, doesn't he have zero foreign experience? Which was it again? Getting dizzy. I'd put you on ignore, but enjoying the free drugs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to silvershadow (Reply #76)

Sun May 1, 2016, 09:19 AM

99. Jane and Bernie are more than well off. And I believe

there is probably quite a bit more that we haven't seen yet. There is no conceivable explanation for their failure to 1) release their taxes and 2) complete the FEC Financial Disclosure form. Yet they keep stalling on both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #99)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:39 PM

110. Upper middle class

 

vs 1 percent.

That is a whisle as well. Keep it up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:44 PM

18. Its pathetic...this is all the dead enders have to cling to

 

Since Bernie lost the primary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #18)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:15 PM

21. All to cling to? I'm clinging to hearing from Hillary about her transcripts, breaking up big banks

 

and ending fracking, returning Glass Steagall, and a few more things. Like single payer healthcare.

This is what we cling to.

If your statement is correct, then if it's a dead end, what do we cling to? Your hate? Your non substance and lack of issues? It's all about her experience and I don't think she did so well.

Convince me to vote for Hillary, and no fair injecting the shit and shittier argument.

Go.....tick...tick....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #21)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:31 PM

25. Ok I'll play

 

If you don't vote for Hillary in the GE, you hate your family, your friends and your country.

Why?

Because you willing hand them all over to a demagogue/madman and his fascist party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #25)


Response to Post removed (Reply #30)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:02 PM

37. Actually, I'd be more worried about Bernie getting us

into some kind of a situation where our use of force was required. He's cranky, doesn't listen well and hates to be told he's wrong. Plus, I haven't seen much evidence of his 'expertise' in foreign affairs, except for wanting to disconnect from the rest of the world as much as Trump says he wants to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #37)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:07 PM

41. Riiight, because Sanders is such a war hawk

and Hillary is such a dove. Just look at all the good she's done in the Middle East with Syria and Libya. A regular Garden of Eden over there- she has made it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #41)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:12 PM

48. If you think anybody is in a position to make that area a 'garden of Eden'

then you're more naive than I think. He doesn't have to be a 'war hawk' to bumble his way into a situation where we're obliged to use military force. God protect us from well-meaning ideologues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #48)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:03 PM

71. And may your god help us all from blood thirsty, power hungry would be leaders

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #71)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:07 PM

73. Didn't I just read this post at Free Republic? The language

sounds awfully similar to the garbage regularly posted over there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #73)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:08 PM

75. I wouldn't know. I don't frequent the site

But apparently you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #75)

Sun May 1, 2016, 09:21 AM

100. Then you have someone at FR that thinks almost

exactly as you do. Sure you're posting on the right site?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #25)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:40 PM

111. Facepalm

 

No ability to deal with issues

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:45 PM

19. I heard that Jane wanted to be "the next Abigail Fillmore"

 

whatever that means

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #19)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:49 PM

87. Really? I would have picked a different Abigail.

I always thought that Abigail Adams was one of our best first ladies. Abigail Fillmore's years in the WH were not memorable. Her husband had been Zachary Taylor's VP and became president when Taylor died. Abigail had been a teacher and spent much of her time reading. She entrusted most of her first lady's duties to her daughter. She died from pneumonia shortly after leaving the WH.

Why would Jane want to be a first lady in Abigail's mold?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #87)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:56 PM

91. She might be thinking of the wrong Fillmore.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #91)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 05:00 PM

92. LOL!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:18 PM

2. The problem is nobody knows what the FBI has uncovered if anything.

It could be huge it could be nothing but in the meantime our future is at stake.

I happen to agree with Jane on this tho. The sooner the better!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #2)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:19 PM

22. You missed the CSPAN report, not reported anywhere else yet. It's really

 

about 'finding' anything, or what was or wasn't classified. It's about the basic finding of a server in her basement, un-tethered to anything in our government. Like a terrorist, with a server, working with those, the president actually said he did not want advice taken from

It doesn't matter who was using it. The matter is 'espionage'. Pure, as the exit polling. That is the problem. It's Obama's DOJ pussyfooting around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #22)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:38 PM

28. I am guessing this is another of those anonymous posts put up on span that has nothing

 

To do with CSPAN but which unscrupulous people have been using to shill silly and ridiculous conspiracy theories, as they have done before. Insane nonsense that cannot beep substantiated by facts is usually not reported by anyone who pretends to aspire to credibility, that is why you have only seen it in places where no one is fact checking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #22)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:58 PM

34. I meant other than what's currently known

But what was the cspan report you mentioned? I don't have cable so I know I haven't seen that yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #34)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:06 PM

40. Youtube has lots of stuff, do a search on youtube for the clinton email scandal

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #22)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:03 PM

38. Wow. Now we have a new meme: It's ESPIONAGE!!!!

Quick - indict Hillary for TREASON! (Sorry - it's already been posted on Free Republic).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #38)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:16 PM

50. Damn right wing

Talking points day in and day out. I sure will be glad when we get rid of those who spew that shit all the time! I wonder how much Karl Rove is paying these days?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Andy823 (Reply #50)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:19 PM

54. I can't wait! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:19 PM

4. She's right...even if the results are complete exoneration.

 

Dragging it out only plays into the GOP's hands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #4)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:28 PM

8. I doubt that there will ever be complete exoneration

Even if there are no charges filed, the suspicion will linger that Obama improperly intervened to squelch the investigation or at least to keep the results from being made public before the convention.

But you're right, the longer this thing is kept under wraps, the wilder the speculation will become about what is really going on. By the time of the convention, Clinton will be rumored to be about to be charged with treason and hanged. And a lot of people will believe it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #8)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:37 PM

14. Lets separate official exoneration from exoneration by conspiracy kooks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #14)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:07 PM

43. So the FBI are "consipracy kooks" now? Sounds like they're not the ones who have gone off

 

the rails

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #43)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:20 PM

55. you missed my meaning completely, which was exactly the opposite. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:25 PM

7. Jane WTH is yours and Bernie's personal financial disclosure???

 

The BS campaign asks for 45-day extension in filing Sanders' latest personal financial disclosure (HCG)

Last edited Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:45 PM - Edit history (3)

AlGiordano ‏@AlGiordano 16m16 minutes ago
AlGiordano Retweeted Dave Levinthal
Until five days after the California primary. What a coincidence!


The @BernieSanders campaign asks for 45-day extension in filing Sanders' latest personal financial disclosure

https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/725677061084446720

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1107119132 (HCG)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:36 PM

13. Right. The Sander's are hiding millions received from their Wall Street benefactors!

 


Good point. Are you also demanding that Bernie and Jane release transcripts of their speeches before their pals on Wall Street?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:30 PM

9. "Get the lead out"? That is NOT what she said. People should look at the video.

And while we're at "getting the lead out", she PROMISED Andrea Mitchell on the air two weeks ago that she'd release Sanders' tax returns "WHEN they're due". They were due 12 days ago, where are they.

They put up that irrelevant "transcripts" argument when confronted with the tax return questions. Two separate subjects.

Where are the tax returns? Why are they requesting an extension to file Sanders' PERSONAL finance disclosure report until after the last primary?

Seems curious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:33 PM

11. Everybody knows she did nothing wrong

Even the Chinese hacker kids

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skink (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:47 PM

31. lol

hey you Chinese kids, stay offa my cloud !!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skink (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:05 PM

39. The ultimate killer argument: "Everybody knows".

Well, I'm certainly persuaded. I had no idea that 'everybody knows' anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:34 PM

12. Pathetic.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:37 PM

15. Get it done. Nothing to hide. Right?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Reply #15)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:10 PM

20. It has been done many times and the rw and now Sanders is making sure it will never be done.

 

Most of us get this having watched for a couple decades. As I said.....

Pathetic Sanders and his supporters play in this game then expect support from Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:39 PM

16. how is discussing it on Faux News network "not politicizing it" ?

Perhaps she should learn various ways of saying no comment if that is really the intention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #16)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:10 PM

45. I emailed them that they shoud bring it up more. It is a HUGE factor for the Democrats

 

to take into account that their leading candidate is under criminal investigation by the FBI.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #16)

Sun May 1, 2016, 09:37 AM

102. You mean like the President did?

I kinda thought the President should say no comment. I'm sure he had his reasons like perhaps it was the agreed upon price to promote a Supreme Court nominee.

A candidates wife I think has less of a duty to say no comment IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:43 PM

17. I usually try not to get candidates' spouses into these things, but I really don't like her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:19 PM

23. Of course she is honest

and she speaks for many of us

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #23)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:07 PM

42. There appear to be some serious questions about monies

spent by Burlington College to the benefit of her daughter and son-in-law. But not to worry - she's honest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #23)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:11 PM

47. Of course,

 

it must be that everyone else just doesn't get it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:21 PM

24. My goodness, Jane Sanders has the political acumen of an empty paper bag

All she ever says in interview after interview are rote regurgitation of Bernie talking points. I am heartily glad she has no chance of becoming First Lady.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #24)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:23 PM

57. "Regurgitating Bernie talking points"

Yep, that's about it. A "yes man" for Bernie...ideologues generally have a hard time with ideas that contradict their strident beliefs.

I want a president who can bend, pivot, adjust, etc. like Obama does. Unfortunately, that is NOT Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #24)

Sun May 1, 2016, 12:01 PM

103. Hillary needs a teleprompter at her small meetings. Bernie and Jane don't at their big meetings.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Reply #103)

Sun May 1, 2016, 04:24 PM

117. Perhaps because their dictionary has nothing but "YUUUGE" and "BANK"


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:33 PM

26. I don't think they extradited Gruccifer for grins and giggles

I don't think they granted immunity just because of a few classified emails. But, speaking of Gruccifer the biggest problem I see with him is he wasn't an actual hacker, it was a hobby and he used different methods than hackers do. He got Sid's emails. Now if a hobbyist can get emails that far up into the chain what could an actual hacker have gotten?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #26)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:15 PM

49. And he got Sid's emails to and from Hillary and there was classified info in them

 

Those were the emails about Libya that Hillary told congress didn't exist.
Also, they contained HER email address. Of course it wasn't that hard to figure out. 4 days before her SoS job started she registered her domain name "ClintonEmail.com". So if you were a hacker and you saw that name you might think" Hey, maybe this has something to do with Clinton and her emails." Just sayin' . . . . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #49)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:24 PM

58. All righty then ClintonEmail.com

That I had not read about. It's comical even more comical than an ACME Road Runner trapping kit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:44 PM

29. what we don't want is our Democratic nominee to be indicted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 01:49 PM

32. I believe the sander's should stop alienating democrats now...

If they want another shot at the presidency, both of them need start healing this divide within the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dubyadiprecession (Reply #32)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:25 PM

59. At least in my thinking, this thread isn't about party unity but the FBI investigation

 

I wonder what your comment has to do with that? Besides nothing, that is.
I would like to see this serious issue discussed seriously, instead of the denial and deflection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:00 PM

36. Better now than 3 months from now. Or, if elected, one year from now.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #36)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:08 PM

44. Even better than 'not indicted at all', right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #44)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:16 PM

51. I doubt she will be. But, if the law calls for it, don't you think she should be?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #51)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:19 PM

53. If she is it's because the law called for it. What I think

it 'should be' is irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #53)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:29 PM

62. Then why bother thinking at all?

 

If your thoughts on anything are irrelevant. Are your thoughts relevant about anything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #62)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:54 PM

70. Ask a silly question - get a silly answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #70)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:06 PM

72. I was asking you for your opinion.

 

And, got a silly answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #72)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:07 PM

74. My opinion, like yours, is totally irrelevant.

She will either be indicted or she will not. The rest is just mental masturbation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #74)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:15 PM

77. Still no opinion on whether she should be indicted if found to be in violation?

 

Or, is your answer(?) a sort of Zen koan pointing out that all life is an illusion and irrelevant?

I think that many voters would find an indictment/no indictment of Hillary relevant when they vote.

Is winning/losing an election relevant to what you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #77)

Sun May 1, 2016, 09:17 AM

98. An indictiment

would be indicative that the FBI and AG persuaded a Grand Jury that there was sufficient evidence to charge her with a violation. Some people would find this relevant. Professionally I don't place a whole lot of credence in merely getting a Grand Jury to indict. Prosecutors do it all the time, whether the person indicted is actually guilty or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:11 PM

46. She's got a point and I'm puzzled why Hillary supporters aren't verklempt.

In my mind, if this was a simple open and shut investigation, it would have been over long ago. Since it's dragging on and on, it makes me fear something really bad is going to happen at a really bad time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #46)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:26 PM

60. They are discovering more and more. They thought it would be tied up in January. Now they

 

think May.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #46)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:21 PM

106. Yes look how quickly the White Water investigation wrapped up

After all the Clintons were the victims in that scam so in a matter of hours, days, weeks, or years it got cleared up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz cook (Reply #106)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:31 PM

107. What's your point?

Do you want to drag this out until she's in office? Wouldn't it be nice if they wrapped this up before we elected her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #107)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:43 PM

112. That you are

being deliberately obtuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz cook (Reply #112)

Sun May 1, 2016, 03:28 PM

114. Or I might prefer reality.

Ignoring bad things won't make them go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:16 PM

52. Perhaps this may be the first time the Clinton Shuffle doesn't work.

 

Imagine Slick Willy in the White House, yet again, with nothing to do and HRC out doing the governing. He'll need a full time MALE nanny.

And speaking of firsts...the first spousal White House residents, to have impeachment travails. Hers will likely be served on Day 2.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #52)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:29 PM

63. Some Republicans have already talked about it. With the emails that have come out,

 

they now know she lied to them in the Benghazi hearings. . . .And you know to them at least, lying to congress is a high crime or something like that. . . . I can hear the posturing now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #63)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:39 PM

66. Yes, the high/low point takeaway from that "amazing performance" was....

 

"Well what does it matter?" Perhaps even more than we thought?

Oh they are ready, all right. The white hot 2 decade hatred (which is overblown, but still a reality) between the two factions is legendary.

That a large portion of Establishment Democrats think their denial about this highly flawed candidate with some new ones thrown in for good measure, aka, Foundation...which will likely create her to be our nominee...will be honored by the Republicans is in the category of science fiction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:20 PM

56. I think the email controversy is complete bullshit, but it would be nice to get it out of the way

if the FBI are going to press charges, regardless of merit, you don't want that bomb being dropped in the GE.

I doubt Clinton has ever concerned herself with the minutiae of IT policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to killbotfactory (Reply #56)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:31 PM

64. Yea, except they have 2 emails of her explaining to someone on her staff

 

how to remove the classification markings so he can fax her some classified talking points on a non-secure line.

Is that what you'd call "minutiae of IT policy?"


PS. It really isn't about how you "think" about the email controversy. What matters are the facts. And a lot of very damning facts have come out. Best read up and see if your "thinking" changes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #64)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:46 PM

67. Our government officials are largely clueless when it comes to tech issues.

We have democratic senators proposing that we make it illegal to use encryption that can't be broken, ffs.

If there were a coherent system in place, implemented to secure state secrets or whatever, that she bypassed, that would be damning. But I don't think that's what happened, because there was no coherent system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to killbotfactory (Reply #67)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:53 PM

80. Again, you base it on what you "think" rather than what happened,.

 


That's exactly what she did. Rather than be in the government secure system that they monitor all day every day. She set up her own server at home to bypass that network. It was not secure. I heard one guy talk about it and I can't remember the level of security she had on her server but it was minimal. He said there was an extra-marital dating site that had the next higher level of security which made it 64,000 times more secure and it was hacked and all their date put out on the internet.

One congressman who had been an Air Force pilot for 14 years and is now on the intelligence committee, he read those 22 top level emails and said they had sources, methods and human asset information on them. He said it was obvious they were classified.

In the agreement she signed under oath, it said that information is classified whether it is marked or not, it is the content that is classified. And one example this congressman gave, he said this wasn't what it actually said but suppose you got an email that listed 10 of our undercover agents in another country with their names and addresses? Even if it isn't marked, you should KNOW that is classified.

She put our most secret national security information out there unprotected. She did ALL her SoS work on that personal, unsecure, unencrypted server.

People in the intelligence community are shocked that she was able to get away with it for so long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #64)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:48 PM

68. They also have emails between her

 

and someone Obama did not want anywhere near his administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to killbotfactory (Reply #56)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:53 PM

69. It should not matter whether Hillary concerns herself with the minutiae of IT policy or not.

That is what she has staff for. They should have known better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to -none (Reply #69)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:55 PM

81. And they are required by law to report it if they see any misuse of classified information.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #81)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 05:02 PM

93. Reality and the law says yes. But it depends on who is abusing things.

There is a line between "us" and "them" and it depends on who "them" is and how embarrassing it is to whom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:29 PM

61. Isn't Ms. Sanders being investigated for irregularities

At Burlington College?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Reply #61)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:32 PM

65. They can start investigating Jane next, hopefully they will get the lead out and

get on this case of fraud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Reply #61)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:17 PM

79. No

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:57 PM

82. Interesting fact I heard today

 

First, we know that she had her own personal server so that she had control over her email and not the government. Talk about 'transparency'.

Well, I just heard that after she left her job as a Senator, ALL of her email from that time were "lost". Hmmmmm. Look like a pattern of non-transparency to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #82)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:53 PM

89. If I had been attacked for years and years.

I would not leave a paper trail...first the GOP attacks and now the BS folks are helping them by attacking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #82)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 06:58 PM

97. Really?

That is something that would be looked at I imagine. Where did you hear that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:51 PM

88. Jane figured out that an indictment would be the only way that her husband could get the nomination.

I guess she's keeping her fingers crossed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 04:53 PM

90. Jane needs to stop doing interviews

This is not helping her husband nor his cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #90)

Sun May 1, 2016, 12:20 PM

104. "Jane needs to stop doing interviews This is not helping his cause." Is that a sexist comment?

 


It's their cause, not just Bernie's cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Reply #104)

Sun May 1, 2016, 03:47 PM

116. Is Jane on the ballot somewhere?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 05:38 PM

95. Oh, the gloat will be FANTASTIC

 

No mercy on the Indictment-Wishers.

They are the lowest scum in this election, both parties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #95)

Sun May 1, 2016, 09:25 AM

101. damn that rule of law

 

no true Democrat would ever insist on equal justice when the stakes are so high.

She didn't do it, nobody saw her do it, and there's no way they can prove anything!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sun May 1, 2016, 12:41 PM

105. Seems to me HRC supporters would be inclined to agree with Jane Sanders on this matter. Get it done

 

Get it done and over with so, that the very predictable nightmare of a significant scandal isn't THE cause of a failed campaign in the G.E.

The Right Wing Media isn't going to dismiss this easily, but HRC's media (CNN/MSNBC/ABC/PBS) may be forced to report on the findings, no matter the outcome.

They may only give a whisper of a mention or not report on it at all, UNLESS the findings go to the level of a grand jury I suppose. Seems to me, the party establishment would rather avoid the prospect of that kind of spectur during the G.E.

But then the judgement of the party establishment has been rather baffling to me in many respects.

Lacking foresight is not exactly a winning strategy, imo.



.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sun May 1, 2016, 01:35 PM

108. Where are the tax returns, Jane? Why the foot dragging?

It's not cute anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imagine2015 (Original post)

Sun May 1, 2016, 02:03 PM

113. This thread feeds into the ugliness and hatefulness of anti-Bernie commenters.

 

Jane did NOT say, "get the lead out." Answering questions, she said the Sanders campaign did not want to politicize it , but "it would be nice if the FBI moved it along." And she said it with a laugh.

In putting false phrases like "get the lead out" in her mouth, you misrepresent Jane Sanders and you feed into the lies and scorn of the ugliest, nastiest commenters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread