Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Hillary Clinton Tag

Posted by Mike LaChance on March 05, 2015 44 Comments
The Hillary Clinton email scandal is growing worse by the day. We now know that she not only used a private email account in her time at the State Department but she even hosted it on a private server in her New York residence. In classic Clintonian doublespeak, Hillary tweeted just before midnight last night that she really, truly, wanted everyone to see her emails, so she told the State Department to release them. But the issue is not what she turned over to State, but what she didn't. Hillary's team selected what was turned over to the State Department, so her tweet is a complete distraction that doesn't address the problem: Hillary Tweet See Emails Other issues involve why she set up a home-based email server for official business, which gave her complete control over access in violation of public records laws.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 04, 2015 27 Comments
Hillary Clinton's email scandal gets worse by the day. First, the NY Times broke the story of Hillary's exclusive use of personal email account, raising serious security issues in addition to record keeping issues.  Then WaPo broke that Hillary set up her own email domain. The White House appears ready to abandon her on the issue: AP reports that Hillary had her own email server in her house:
The email practices of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who used a private account exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state, grew more intriguing with the disclosure Wednesday that the computer server she used traced back to her family's New York home, according to Internet records reviewed by The Associated Press.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on March 04, 2015 37 Comments
The plot thickens. Monday, the New York Times broke the story about Hillary Clinton's little email problem. The former Secretary of State used a personal email account the entire time she served as DOS's top dog. As Professor Jacobson pointed out yesterday, use of personal email for state business appears to be in violation of record keeping rules. This morning, the Associated Press reported that not only was Clinton using a personal email account, she was running the account from servers located in her home (emphasis added):
The computer server that transmitted and received Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails — on a private account she used exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state — traced back to an Internet service registered to her family’s home in Chappaqua, New York, according to Internet records reviewed by The Associated Press. The highly unusual practice of a Cabinet-level official physically running her own email would have given Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, impressive control over limiting access to her message archives. It also would distinguish Clinton’s secretive email practices as far more sophisticated than some politicians, including Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin, who were caught conducting official business using free email services operated by Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc.
The AP report suggests Clinton was using the server to navigate around transparency:
Operating her own server would have afforded Clinton additional legal opportunities to block government or private subpoenas in criminal, administrative or civil cases because her lawyers could object in court before being forced to turn over any emails. And since the Secret Service was guarding Clinton’s home, an email server there would have been well protected from theft or a physical hacking.
And then there's this ghost that ran Clinton's servers:
It was unclear whom Clinton hired to set up or maintain her private email server, which the AP traced to a mysterious identity, Eric Hoteham. That name does not appear in public records databases, campaign contribution records or Internet background searches. Hoteham was listed as the customer at Clinton’s $1.7 million home on Old House Lane in Chappaqua in records registering the Internet address for her email server since August 2010.

Posted by Mike LaChance on March 03, 2015 23 Comments
Leaders in the Democratic Party have begun to figure out that if their far left base gets too excited about a candidate like Elizabeth Warren, it could create problems for the presumed nominee, Hillary Clinton. Weasel Zippers points to a column by Think Progress:
Sexist Warren Buffett Goes On The War Path Against Liz Warren (Socialist – MA) – She Is Too ‘Angry’ And ‘Violent’ With Rich People Liz sure as heck isn’t friendly with the middle class either.
Via Think Progress: In an interview Monday morning with CNBC, Berkshire Hathaway CEO and billionaire Warren Buffett was asked what he thinks of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and her views of Wall Street. “I think that she would do better if she was less angry and demonized less,” he responded. “I believe in hate the sin, love the sinner, and I also believe in praising by name and criticizing by category.” He continued that while there are “plenty of other candidates” whose political style he doesn’t agree with, “I do think it’s — I think it’s a mistake to get angry with your, with people that disagree with you,” he said of her. “In the end we do have to work together… And it does not help when you demonize or get too violent with the people you’re talking to.”[…] But Buffett’s use of the emotional word “angry” may be a sign of some subtle sexism.
The effort to squash the 'Warren wing' is on. Big time.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 03, 2015 56 Comments
News broke yesterday, via The NY Times, that Hillary Clinton used a personal email account to conduct government business the entire time she was Secretary of State, which would appear to be a violation of record-keeping rules:
Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record. Mrs. Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act. It was only two months ago, in response to a new State Department effort to comply with federal record-keeping practices, that Mrs. Clinton’s advisers reviewed tens of thousands of pages of her personal emails and decided which ones to turn over to the State Department. All told, 55,000 pages of emails were given to the department. Mrs. Clinton stepped down from the secretary’s post in early 2013.
WaPo further reports that Hillary created a separate domain for her email just before assuming office:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 01, 2015 20 Comments
Martin O'Mally [damn - I spelled his name wrong] (quick, look him up on Wikipedia, and let me know who he is) is spoken about in certain circles as a possible challenger to Billary. The New York Times reports that Marty (is it okay to call him that?) is jabbing at Billary, Martin O’Malley, in Veiled Jab at Hillary Clinton, Derides Politics of ‘Triangulation’:
Martin O’Malley, the former Maryland governor who is likely to seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2016, took a veiled shot at a potential rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a speech in South Carolina on Saturday, criticizing the politics of “triangulation” that have historically been associated with the Clintons. “The most fundamental power of our party and our country is the power of our moral principles,” Mr. O’Malley said, according to a transcript of his remarks provided by an aide. In words that echoed those of Senator Barack Obama when he battled Mrs. Clinton in 2007 for the Democratic nomination, Mr. O’Malley added: “Triangulation is not a strategy that will move America forward. History celebrates profiles in courage, not profiles in convenience.” Mr. O’Malley’s comments came at the Democratic Party’s John Spratt Issues Conference in Myrtle Beach, and South Carolina is a crucial early primary state that Mrs. Clinton lost to Mr. Obama. Mr. O’Malley has in the past declined to contrast himself with Mrs. Clinton.... The remarks from Mr. O’Malley, who is viewed as facing an uphill battle, signaled a new phase both of his own efforts, after a year of saying he was not in “compare-contrast” mode with Mrs. Clinton, and of the early 2016 campaign.
Billary is scared. Very scared.

Posted by Mike LaChance on March 01, 2015 8 Comments
Ever since the Benghazi attack that killed an American ambassador and three other Americans, Hillary supporting liberals have been calling the incident a non-issue but facts are stubborn things. They'll undoubtedly give the same white wash to the fact that the Clinton Foundation has accepted donations from foreign governments. Yet even MSNBC's Chris Matthews has acknowledged that these issues are serious. Video via the Washington Free Beacon:

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 24, 2015 11 Comments
When it comes to talk of banks and money in America, Elizabeth Warren says the game is rigged. In the case of the Clinton Family Foundation, she may have a point. A new ad from American Crossroads uses Elizabeth Warren's own words to skewer the Clintons and the funds they freely take from foreign governments. The Washington Free Beacon reports:
Ad Featuring Elizabeth Warren Hits Clinton Foundation on Money from Foreign Governments American Crossroads has found the unlikeliest of partners: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.). In an ad released Monday, the Super PAC headed by Karl Rove attacked Clinton for reports that the Clinton Foundation has accepted millions of dollars from countries barred from making political contributions.
Watch the video. It's short but it makes a powerful point.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 22, 2015 33 Comments
If you think the mainstream media is not out to elect Hillary Clinton in 2016 every bit as much as it was for Obama in 2008 and 2012, then you need your head examined. The multi-day and ongoing demand that Scott Walker verify that Obama is Christian and loves America is a good example. Why is it that Republican candidates and politicians are required to verify the bona fides of Democrats? Here are three questions I have yet to hear Obama or any Democrat asked:

1. Should Joe Biden stop touching women without consent?

2. Is Elizabeth Warren Native American?

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 21, 2015 21 Comments
The over-vilification of the Democrats' favorite boogeymen may have cost them the Senate last year. Turns out that crying "Koch" is not what voters want to hear. Who knew? Oh that's right, everyone who was not Harry Reid. Who can forget Harry Reid's exceptional case of Koch Derangement Syndrome? Among the many missteps in Democratic strategy, the perpetual whining about the Koch brothers was listed as a contributing factor to the Democrats' subpar performance in last year's midterm elections.

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 20, 2015 27 Comments
According to recent reports, the Clinton Foundation is accepting large donations from foreign governments. Accusations of influence peddling are already being made. James V. Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus of the Wall Street Journal:
Foreign Government Gifts to Clinton Foundation on the Rise The Clinton Foundation has dropped its self-imposed ban on collecting funds from foreign governments and is winning contributions at an accelerating rate, raising ethical questions as Hillary Clinton ramps up her expected bid for the presidency. Recent donors include the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Australia, Germany and a Canadian government agency promoting the Keystone XL pipeline. In 2009, the Clinton Foundation stopped raising money from foreign governments after Mrs. Clinton became secretary of state. Former President Bill Clinton, who ran the foundation while his wife was at the State Department, agreed to the gift ban at the behest of the Obama administration, which worried about a secretary of state’s husband raising millions while she represented U.S. interests abroad. The ban wasn’t absolute; some foreign government donations were permitted for ongoing programs approved by State Department ethics officials.
The panel on Special Report with Bret Baier addressed the issue last night: Considering their prior position on this issue, the Democratic Party's silence is surprising.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 17, 2015 33 Comments
I've said it before, and I stand by it: Elizabeth Warren would crush Hillary, and they both know it. If you doubted that Hillary knew it, read this NY Times account of their recent meeting, Hillary Clinton, Privately, Seeks the Favor of Elizabeth Warren:
Hillary Rodham Clinton held a private, one-on-one meeting with Senator Elizabeth Warren in December at Mrs. Clinton’s Washington home, a move by the Democrats’ leading contender in 2016 to cultivate the increasingly influential senator and leader of the party’s economic populist movement. The two met at Whitehaven, the Clintons’ Northwest Washington home, without aides and at Mrs. Clinton’s invitation. Mrs. Clinton solicited policy ideas and suggestions from Ms. Warren, according to a Democrat briefed on the meeting, who called it “cordial and productive.” Mrs. Clinton, who has been seeking advice from a range of scholars, advocates and officials, did not ask Ms. Warren to consider endorsing her likely presidential candidacy. Aides to Mrs. Clinton did not immediately respond to requests for comment, and aides to Ms. Warren could not be reached. The conversation occurred at a moment when Ms. Warren’s clout has become increasingly evident.
It's not quite Bill Maher territory, but Hillary at some point may need to get down on one knee and propose a high level cabinet post in order to keep Liz out of the race, or if she stays out, to get Warren to bless the Hillary campaign. https://youtu.be/uUiehszTswU Warren backers see this as an unequal relationship, as in Hillary is barely worthy of being in the presence of Liz, via Bloomberg:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 11, 2015 19 Comments
I'm a believer, a true believer, that Elizabeth Warren would crush Hillary, if she wanted to. Just Run, Elizabeth, Run! Now a poll backs me up, Shock poll: Warren leads Clinton in Iowa, N.H.:
Populist groups cheering "Run Warren Run," today released 2016 election polls from Iowa and New Hampshire showing Sen. Elizabeth Warren ahead of dominant Democrat Hillary Clinton. The YouGov poll of likely Democratic voters for MoveOn.org and Democracy for America also found that 79 percent want Warren and majorities support her anti-Wall Street positions. The poll of 400 conducted Jan. 30 to Feb. 5 put Warren ahead of Clinton in Iowa, 31 percent to 24 percent. In New Hampshire, her lead is 30 percent to 27 percent.
SCIENCE! Why do some people hate SCIENCE?

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 25, 2015 12 Comments
As the race for 2016 shifts into gear, old conflicts are reemerging between Hillary Clinton supporters and Team Obama; this time, it's over access to Obama's massive email lists. Amie Parnes and Niall Stanage of The Hill reported:
Obama, Clinton tensions build over email lists ahead of 2016 New tensions are emerging in the relationship between allies of President Obama and Hillary Clinton. At issue is the fate of the political equivalent of gold dust — the enormous email list, comprised of many millions of supporters and donors, that the Obama team has compiled over the course of his two presidential campaigns. The Clinton camp would dearly love to get its hands on the list, but there is no promise as yet that the president’s aides will comply. There are “large concerns” about the lists among Clinton supporters, one Hillary ally told The Hill. To the Clintons and their friends, it’s near unthinkable that a Democratic president — who has plenty of reasons to want a member of his party to succeed him — would withhold such a valuable commodity. But Team Obama has long believed that the president’s support is built upon the bedrock of his personal qualities rather than mere party identification. His people are loath to be seen as treating the passion of his supporters in a cavalier fashion. “There’s a lot of data — voter data, massive email lists — that Obama built and there are a lot of people who want to make sure that he spreads that wealth,” the Clinton ally said. “They want to make sure he doesn’t take it in a suitcase back to Chicago and move on. No one wants to see it disappear or have it used just to build a library.”
Democrats are probably hoping everyone has forgotten how ugly the conflict between Hillary and Obama became during the 2008 Democratic primary. There's plenty of evidence that the rift never healed.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 13, 2015 13 Comments
Until now, it's been purely present tense. "I am not running for President." The tea leaf readers were undeterred, insisting that Warren had not ruled out running in the future. BREAKING: A possible twist. Someone asked Warren if she is "going to run" for President, and she said "No." Granted, the words "going to run" did not come from her mouth, but were built into the question, but she did say "No." TPM reports:
Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) gave a new type of answer about possibly running for president: she's not going to run for president. Warren, a favorite of the liberal wing of the Democratic party, was asked if she was going to run for president in an interview with Sheila Bair for Fortune magazine. "So are you going to run for president?" Bair asked. "No," Warren responded. That response is different from one Warren gave in an interview with NPR where she said she's not running for president but declined to say in the future tense that she wouldn't run for president. Fans of Warren running for president in 2016 said this showed that she had not completely closed the door to the idea.
How significant is this? She didn't say it herself.  It could have been Warren didn't pick up on the nuance between present and future (?) tenses: Elizabeth Warren Not Going To Run The Wall Street Journal reports the progressive groups who want Warren to run are undeterred:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 10, 2015 28 Comments
Hillary is the presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee. She has a large double-digit lead over other potential contenders. The one thing Hillary doesn't have, however, is grassroots enthusiasm. Her support as the presumptive nominee is a mile wide and an inch deep. She's popular because of name recognition and organizational power. No one wants to be on Bill and Hillary's enemies list. But Hillary has an image problem, as reflected in this Jay Leno appearance, via The Daily Caller:
Comedian Jay Leno says he likes presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, but she just seems so old. Speaking of Clinton on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” Friday, Leno commented, “I don’t see the fire.” “Her and Elizabeth Warren are almost the same age,” Leno said, comparing Hillary to the Massachusetts senator beloved by the left wing of the Democratic Party. “And I see Elizabeth Warren come out — ‘boom’ — throwing punches. ‘Boom, boom, boom, boom.’” “And I like her,” Leno continued, speaking of Hillary. “But she seems to be sort of, she seems very slow and very — I don’t see that fire, you know, that fire that I used to see, that I see in Elizabeth Warren. Because I say to people, ‘how much younger is Elizabeth Warren than Hillary?’ And people go, ‘oh, 15 years.’ No! 18 months.”
Elizabeth Warren, by contrast? She's intriguing:
Accessibility by WAH