tell me how Hillary's email issues are NOT going to be a problem in the GE

[0rganism]

to keep this from devolving into a "Bernie fans are in denial" thread, i'll start with this. look, i'm not anti-Hillary. i think she's an incredibly smart person with a boundless capacity for policy wonking. however, she seems like a weak candidate, kind of the queen of unforced errors, and that's one of the things that prevented me from supporting her in the primaries. i have my own issues with SBS which prevented me from supporting him, too, but that's not my focus here.

so anyway in a couple months, we'll be full swing into the general election. at this point, it looks very much like HRC is going to be the Democratic nominee. i am absolutely, without a doubt, confident that GOP SuperPACs with names like "Justice for America" and "Americans Against Corrupt Government" will be running anti-Hillary ads using the email fiasco as a centerpiece, unless she finds a way to completely neutralize it as a campaign issue. they won't just be saying she violated State Dept. protocols, they'll say she compromised national security to protect shady deals with the Clinton Foundation et al.

not saying the attacks will be based on valid grounds, they rarely are. but anything that makes her appear less likable, less trustworthy, or generally less popular drives down turnout. low turnout gives the GOP an opening to win the presidency and hold the senate in what was really looking like a complete clusterfuck election for them about 3 months ago.

my question is, how does she put this scandal behind her? maybe she can't, but maybe she doesn't need to. i don't know. tell me how this situation is going to clear up and blow away and HRC's going to beat the stuffing out of Orange Foolius, cos right now, it looks like a hard rain in November if she's the nominee.

[bonemachine]

1. because nobody cares about them

Haven't you heard? Nobody cares!

[Darb]

8. Baggers care immensly.

So do some others. She's not a IT guru, but I guess she is supposed to be these days. I don't know shit about tech, but I use the hell out of it. I guess I'm not qualified to do what I do.

[bonemachine]

24. I mean, we know she's no IT pro

seeing as checking email on a desktop was over her head...

[Warren DeMontague]

39. But she is an expert on encryption, and wants a "manhattan project" to make sure the FBI

Can get into everyone's snapchats.

[Bob41213]

30. You're right, she wasn't an IT pro, and unfortunately neither was her IT pro.

She knew what she was doing though.

[kwassa]

23. Why the sarcasm? No one cares. Really.

No harm, no foul.

[yodermon]

29. first off all, who do you mean by "no one"?

If you mean, the general electorate, then yeah, they don't care **YET**... because the corp. media hasn't been talking about it nonstop, and the GOPers haven't been running ads with it YET. That is the the point of the OP: when the repukes decide to let loose on her, katie bar the door.

Currently the repukes are following the saying "Do not interrupt your enemy when they are shooting themselves in the foot".
After the convention they'll pile on.

If by no one you just mean "Hillary supporters in general" then i guess you have a point

[kwassa]

31. What harm occurred as a result of her private server?

Spell it out for me.

[IdaBriggs]

35. THIRTY-EIGHT FOIA LAWSUITS, TWO INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORTS (STATE

AND INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY), A YEAR LONG FBI INVESTIGATION, EXTRADITION OF A HACKER FROM ROMANIA, AND MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS WASTED BECAUSE SHE WAS FOLLOWING KARL ROVE'S "HOW TO HIDE GOVERNMENT RECORDS" EXAMPLE SO FAR.

How much money does this woman's bad judgment have to cost the American taxpayer before her supporters say ENOUGH?

[pdsimdars]

37. Not only money, don't forget all the LIVES.

[RBInMaine]

38. That's NUTS. "How to hide government records." Seriously. Please, find planet Earth.

[kwassa]

44. FOIA lawsuits, or FOIA requests?

There is still no crime involved. Saying it all in caps makes no difference, does it?

[IdaBriggs]

46. LAWSUITS. And the FBI (who investigate CRIME) will be explaining

the crimes she committed. In the meantime, guess who is footing the bill?

That would be the taxpayers.

And the reports are already beginning to trickle out about the damage done to the Intelligence Community. I am not sure what part of "hackable server with state secrets endangering national security" is okay with you, so I am going to assume you are simply not up to speed yet.



Sorry for the caps -- very frustrating when people pretend "no big deal" but to be fair, I only started to understand it was a big deal mid-March. I've been very upset about it ever since.

[kwassa]

47. There is no evidence that anything Hillary had done has resulted in damage.

None.

That is why this is like Benghazi.

[IdaBriggs]

48. Prove it. nt

[kwassa]

49. Prove a negative? No thanks.

It is your assertion that the use of her server caused damage, but you haven't said what that might be, other than lawsuits.

Lawsuits happen all the time, and often have no basis. Hillary violated some rules, and so did others in the State Department, but there is no evidence ....

of any damage. None.

Until there is, this story had no real legs, just like the Benghazi investigation.

[IdaBriggs]

50. I have listed how the government is wasting a ton of money.

We also know she has outed intelligence assets with her published emails, and appears to have done so in violation of several federal laws.

If you think those things are no big deal, perhaps all of the people currently facing jail time over similar situations would appreciate your advocacy. The Obama administration

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/kristian-saucier-investigation-hillary-clinton-223646

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/us/marine-classified-info-investigation/index.html

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/06/10/former-nsa-offical-pleads-guilty-to-misdemeanor/

[kwassa]

55. It is the government's choice to waste tons of money.

Not Hillary's.

Wasting money is not, in itself, a crime. If it were, the federal government would have been out of business centuries ago.

Nothing she has done has caused damage to the United States.

No harm, no foul.

This is just like Benghazi, a political stick to beat her with. There is no real crime here, and almost everyone except the partisans realize this. The partisans do, too, but they won't admit it.

[tazkcmo]

54. You just read the parts of the news

that conform to your alternate reality. Lawsuits. Plural. She has not been cooperative until coerced or forced, evasive by use of the private server almost exclusively, didn't forward all her "official" documents upon departure as is required and was negligent in terms of communications security. There is a written report on this which you should read after removing your Rose Garden Glasses.

[kwassa]

56. So? Where is the damage caused by her use of a private email server?

Who hacked her and caused great damage to the US? Or any damage to the US?

You have nothing, either. Nobody had anything, because NOTHING HAPPENED.

This is just partisan bullshit.

[tazkcmo]

60. The OIG isn't partisan.

If the IG is, then it's a Democratic partisanship. It hurts in the trust and competence departments. Luckily, at 91% distrusted, she doesn't have a lot of upward movement available. Unluckily, this sure doesn't help lower it.

Again, you ignore the OIG, recommended by Sec Kerry, nominated by Pres Obama and approved by the Senate. The FBI is also investigating and if there was nothing I believe we'd know that by now. But you and most of her other supporters ignore this also. In addition, you ignore the fact that her IT person was given immunity. That's not SOP, it's significant.

[kwassa]

61. You didn't answer my question. Where is the damage caused by her actions?

The American public, and I, don't give a shit about some technical violations of US email policies and the way they are supposed to be archived.

Where is the damage? There is none of course. Benghazi.

You have nothing. Nobody has anything of substance. Benghazi.

[tazkcmo]

62. OK, one more time

Trust
Credibility
91% distrusted and trying to get elected President
Critical OIG report beyond "technical" violations
Ongoing FBI investigation
Exposing sensitive government information to unneccesary risk of foreign survaillance through the use of an unsecure private server that they had to UNPLUG, at a minimum, twice to try and prevent hacking and their has been no investigation into the success or lack of success in hacking attempts.

"The American public, and I..." I hope you wiped after you pulled this one out.
This part of the American public disagrees with you and 91% of us don't trust her.

[kwassa]

63. I was right. There is no crime. Nothing happening, let's move along.

and where do you get the 91% mistrusted? this is absurd.

Investigations are meaningless. The FBI does not have a great track record. There are now and will be no charges.

I am, at best, a lukewarm Hillary supporter, but Bernie has already lost. Hillary can beat Trump, if she plays it right. This email stuff is a minor league sideshow.

No

one

cares.

[pdsimdars]

33. I totally agree, national security was so 90s! We won the cold war so we're the greatest.

Woo-hoo ! We won. Our nation is the securist nation of all!

[tazkcmo]

53. And it's Bernie's fault!

She's just a total mess at a desktop but better than Big Blue on a Blackberry!

[MisterP]

58. I presume they think that if Clinton wins the nom Trump will not only not go after her, but

drop the whole campaign and give her the first unopposed election since 1789

[tonyt53]

2. So, I suppose a yellow-headed buffoon can present a better image as President of the US?

The only way those emails, or Benghazi can become more of an issue that the crap that Trump has been spewing is if people accept Trump and his message. She will win in a landslide, and Bernie will have no Committee chairmanship in January. He may as well caucus with the GOP, and I bet he will

[0rganism]

7. so non-issue because Trump is worse? got it. n/t

[tazkcmo]

57. What does that have to do with Sec Clinton?

She isn't the nominee yet (She probably will be) and the OIG report wasn't exactly confidence inspiring. Even Sec Clinton admits mistakes and said she'd do it differently. Now it's up to the FBI to determine if her "mistakes" (Bull. She knew what and why and the risks) reach the "unlawful" level. I hope to find out before it's too late to replace her if this escelates.

What ever Trump is or isn't or how friggin' stupid he is has no impact on the FBI investigation. That is pure deflection from you because you have lost the debate on "nobody cares".

As for this tripe:

He may as well caucus with the GOP, and I bet he will.

That's Hillary's shtick.

[Fast Walker 52]

3. it would be a huge issue in a normal year, but Trumpenstein is just that horrible

[lagomorph777]

4. Because she won't be the nominee.

She has really put her foot in it. Even the powers that be can't afford the risk now.

[Lil Missy]

5. because the only people who believe it would never vote for her anyway.

other than that, the rest of us are smart enough to know it's bullshit.

[0rganism]

6. what did you think about the "swiftboating" of John Kerry?

that attack was some of the most egregious bullshit i've seen slung in any election, but it stuck, and turned a decorated war hero into a cowardly wimp who ended up losing the election.

are you saying the electorate has gotten significantly smarter since then?

[Lil Missy]

42. LOL! No! I'm certainly not saying they are smarter now!

[HooptieWagon]

9. Because Republicans are very reasonable and civil.

They would never use reports implicating Clinton of committing a crime against her in a General Election. And they would be SOOOO thrilled to work in bipartisanship with the first female president (a Clinton, no less!), that they'll gladly table all thoughts of impeachment while they gather in Wall Street boardrooms and sing Kumbaya.

[reddread]

10. nasty BernieBros lack civility

must impeach

[BootinUp]

11. Put simply, there are those that will believe anything bad about the Clinton's

Forget them. right.

Similarly she has plenty of strong support.

The rest of the electorate gets to choose between Trump and her. There is no way in my opinion he gets enough of that vote to beat the Obama coalition because of an email story that has been going on for over a year and hasn't significantly hurt her yet. What do I mean significantly? Her poll numbers beat him now. And again I remind you that the RW has been trying to nail her on this for over a year already.

[HooptieWagon]

13. Yea. Clintons have a 30 year track record of scandal, lying, and dishonesty.

I can't understand why people won't give her the benefit of the doubt this time.

[BootinUp]

15. There have been plenty of times I have refuted the meme that Hillary

is some kind of pathological liar, lies all the time, bla bla bla. And it always comes down to like 1 case no one cares about because it has nothing to do with her record of public service, and it hurt no one. I don't care to do again right now.

If you don't understand that a phony scandal is the next best thing to a real one and that accounts for your misperception then I will chalk you up to the ones that can't be convinced and leave it at that.

As far as Bill's issues, lets see what Trump can do with it. Most pollsters are telling him he is making a mistake. Didn't hurt her in New York running for Senate.

Cya.

[0rganism]

17. thanks!

appreciate the answer

[NCTraveler]

12. Trump and the right will bring them up.

Trump is currently out there talking about Vince Foster as well. I don't make my decisions based off those things.

[0rganism]

16. i agree, the Vince Foster thing is (to use an unfortunate cliche') a dead issue for most of us

looks to me like Orange Foolius beats the Vince Foster drum to increase base support -- his base, racists who hate responsible government and everything HRC represents. you won't decide on that basis, because you're not the target audience. that's just his classic carnival barker mentality in action, use whatever call it takes to bring the rubes into your tent.

the email thing, on the other hand, is fresh meat. i think, as it currently stands, a lot of people who we might call "national security centrists" actually will give a shit about this in November. whether Trump can bring them into his tent, as it were, isn't as important to him as the fact that he can keep them out of Hillary's tent.

his campaign strat is clear, and he's executing to it: use attacks based on recent issues to cripple what's left of Hillary's popularity while going back to old school conspiracy crap to motivate his base. if he can reduce turnout overall while boosting his base, he can turn what was looking like a blowout into a tight race, maybe even come out on top. it plays to his strengths, capitalizes on her weakness, seems like he's getting some good campaign advice.

[NCTraveler]

19. Everything about Trump is fresh meat. Everything.

I'm tired of people attempting to make completely one sided points as if Trump is the only one side that will be campaigning.

Why aren't you yelling for his tax returns? Why aren't you yelling about him wanting to punish women who have abortions? Banning Muslisms from entering the country? Building a fence and making Mexio pay for it?

Some things with the one sided arguments from Sanders supporters is transparent.

[0rganism]

26. looks like you need to actually read my post...

... like the part where i said "i have my own issues with SBS which prevented me from supporting him, too"

> Why aren't you yelling for his tax returns? Why aren't you yelling about him wanting to punish women who have abortions? Banning Muslisms from entering the country? Building a fence and making Mexio pay for it?

i will simply point out the obvious: this is DU. what possible benefit could "yelling for his tax returns" on a DU forum have? it's not like Trump's going to listen to me. if he doesn't release his returns, it will indeed be fresh meat and i fully expect the Democratic nominee's campaign to hammer him with it relentlessly, as with the Mexico wall and abortion comments, and about half the other verbal diarrhea that emanates from his puffy orange mouth.

on the other hand, a few people in this thread have been giving me coherent answers to the question i actually did ask that stick to the point, and i appreciate that. yours was one of them, and then you dropped your nasty attack post.

i'm not in this thread to see "my" candidate win the nomination, like i said i'm not tied to either remaining candidate. i'm here asking this question because i want some assurance that HRC is going to really deal with this problem if it requires dealing. i want to see how her supporters here think this can play out to our advantage. otherwise, it really looks like she's damaging her (and other down-ticket races) chances in the fall and putting the entire nation at risk by accepting the nomination.

[NCTraveler]

27. I read your post and gave you a coherent answer.

That comment alone is to stifle real discussion.

[LoverOfLiberty]

14. They won't be a problem in the GE

because like all mini-scandals, it is oming out well ahead of November and will be a non-issue by then.

[JoePhilly]

18. The GOP will be running in circles throwing everything including the kitchen sink at whoever ...

... we nominate.

Hillary will remain calm and professional, as Trump and the GOP become more and more screechy.

And Obama will leverage his strong Presidency and remind everyone that we do not ever want the GOP incotrol of the government again.

[procon]

20. Your issue is too narrowly focused.

Your perception is also skewed as you say, you favor Sanders, and he would certainly benefit from any negative impact on Hillary in the hope that might open up a path for him to win. Of course, it makes perfect sense from your POV, that this is just impossible to overcome so she should withdraw and let Sanders have the baton.

Very few people would deny that she won't face some sort of blowback. But the real question is, how much will actually stick. Remember that the voting public has lived through each and every one of these so called "scandals", the real deals and the hoaxes, the politically motivated, the faked allegations and conspiracy theories for decades. Everyone has heard the media mavens predicting that the end is nigh, and the Republicans gleefully predicting that this time, for sure, they're gonna take her down. But once the dust settles, Hillary walks away unphased by the brouhaha, and the everyone lurches on to the next "scandal". Can she survive another one... sure.

People who have already decided to vote for her will still do so because they found Sanders was an unworthy substitute, and that will not change. Once voters have made up their minds, they are unlikely be persuaded to switch to what they've already written off as the inferior 2nd place runner up.

Look at the average voter, what do they see on their evening news? Maybe another politically motivated argument over petty, office email rules that were OK for Republicans to ignore, but not for a Democrat. For many, this as just another ginned up attack on Hillary, the same as they have seen in the past, and they will likely remain undeterred.

[0rganism]

28. wtf? did you not read my post or just not believe me?

1st paragraph: "i have my own issues with SBS which prevented me from supporting him"

maybe you just missed it. this thread is NOT ABOUT SANDERS in any way. that you started by calling me out personally is really unfortunate, because your last paragraph was actually on point.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. It's a trifle, a mere bagatelle, than noones paying an attention to. Except the FBI and DOS IG.

And, of course, the gentle, always courteous, Republicans will ignore it as unworthy of mention as a gesture of goodwill.

[kwassa]

22. Because no damage occurred from her use of a private email server.

No harm, no foul.

This essential point is missed by most attackers. The general public sees this.

The only people who care are the highly partisan people who want to beat her: supporters of Bernie and supporters of Trump. I think the Bernie supporters care more.

This is also a good deal like the Benghazi investigation: there is really no new news, and there hasn't been new news for a long time. It is an old dead issue.

[kwassa]

43. That was convincing.

but not to a rational person.

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Like this:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

32. Assuming that she is not indicted (which most legal experts do not believe will happen)

I don't see how it stays on the front page. Yeah, we over here can maybe agree that she didn't make the best choices in terms of setting this up but unless it's shown that she did something patently illegal that harmed national security, I just can't fathom how most average people not already inclined to hate Hillary will care. Trump has tons more baggage- and he turns off more people every time he opens his mouth. Hillary- with all of her shortcomings- will still look reasonable and mature by comparison IMHO.

[liberal_at_heart]

34. Even if nothing happens it will still have a stench of being above the rules and that is one of

Hillary's biggest weaknesses with the public. They don't trust her and this will not help her image with the public. I still think the GE will be a toss up because these are two of the most unpopular figures to run for president in recent history.

[IdaBriggs]

36. 38 FOIA lawsuits, her having to testify under oath, another inspector

general report due from the Intellogence Community, results of a year long FBI investigation (with one witness already being granted immunity and another just finalized a deal with DOJ), and the Republicans all set to start hearings on it the fall...

And you think this is going to go away?

You need to share what you're smoking.

[pnwmom]

45. Tell me which candidate has had no problems. Obama was accused of being a non-citizen.

John Kerry was accused of being a war coward. If they don't have dirt, they'll cook it up -- and a good portion of the public will swallow it.

If all they can come up with is that she followed the same procedures that Colin Powell did, they'll really be scraping the bottom of the barrel. (Because she, unlike Colin Powell, produced her emails when requested -- on the paper copies the law requires. She didn't delete them like Colin Powell.)

And meanwhile she has produced 30 years of tax returns -- the Don, ZERO. And he's had 4 corporate bankruptcies, an ongoing lawsuit accusing him and his Trump University of fraud, and proven mafia connections.

Her email situation is a nothingburger compared to the file on him.

[Scootaloo]

51. Magic unicorn farts.

[beachbumbob]

52. Same way Benghazi won't be...whitewater won't be and all other

Conservative tripe....won't make a difference to those of us that care about America and want to save it from the likes of trump..

[sandyshoes17]

59. The media will be relentless

The media will hound her on everything 24/7, and will be pushing Trump and his establishment VP. The media is prepared to take her down. No one gets a second chance it's the republicans turn in the media's, PTB eyes. John McCain was told to give it to Bush and he would be next. They did the same thing for Hillary, they told her to step aside for Obama, and they would back her for the next one. It didn't work for McCain and it won't work for Hillary. This is one gigantic setup by the corporate masters. You all are fools.