Pages:
Author

Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 61. (Read 234761 times)

hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 23, 2015, 12:33:36 AM
Americans think Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton is about as trustworthy as Donald Trump.


It is always helpful to bring a link, an article, numbers, etc to the conversation. You are still welcome if all you have is a personal feeling or belief, of course...

 Smiley



It´s probably this. Got that pic of The Donald there

Trump and Clinton are leading the polls even though most Americans don't trust them

Maxwell Tani
 
Jul. 30, 2015, 10:36 PM    

http://uk.businessinsider.com/poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-trustworthy-honest-2015-7?r=US&IR=T
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 23, 2015, 12:20:49 AM
Americans think Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton is about as trustworthy as Donald Trump.


It is always helpful to bring a link, an article, numbers, etc to the conversation. You are still welcome if all you have is a personal feeling or belief, of course...

 Smiley

hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 22, 2015, 11:56:39 PM
Well, I haven't seen the Donald claim that a video caused four murders in Libya, nor has he persecuted women that Billybob has abused and even raped, and he certainly hasn´t been lying about how his emails are handled, or claiming he was deadbroke at any time in his life. So, that seems pretty trustworthy. The less they lie the better.

full member
Activity: 134
Merit: 100
September 22, 2015, 11:38:42 PM
Americans think Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton is about as trustworthy as Donald Trump.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 22, 2015, 11:35:11 PM
I think the Russians could do business with a sane American scumbag. They can hardly embarrass themselves by congregating much with losers and non-personalities like Obama and Fester Kerry. Don´t get me started with that Biden guy, a cloud of sleep gathers over me zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Anyway, the more I ponder Trump the worse his opposition looks in both parts of the one-party system. Your next Joe Sixpack probably feels pretty much the same. This wasn´t much of a problem in earlier times, the media and other opinion designers got their cues and the right guy for Wall St. and the war business was trumpeted up with ease, sometimes out of the blue nowhere. But nowadays I´m not so sure that it works so well. People have watched too many flopped war promotions and failed financial productions to take the media and the experts very seriously anymore. So that all bodes well for Trump.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 22, 2015, 10:39:59 PM


Trump makes money if the US is doing well, etc. He builds hotels, golf courses, sells apartments, casinos, etc.
Wall street can make money betting the economy will tank. Wall street makes money up, or down. That is why trump is worth $10B and bloomberg $38.5B.




They certainly make money up and down but I doubt that it´s much of a bet. And how much that has to do with the real economy is anybody´s guess especially after years and years of money printing at zero %. It´s probably one big inside job and that´s nothing new. But these days they have their own inside job under much better control than a few decades ago especially due to technology and that gigantic money manufacturing. And of course their political and media lapdogs have never been more obedient and domesticated than now.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 09:03:54 PM


Trump makes money if the US is doing well, etc. He builds hotels, golf courses, sells apartments, casinos, etc.
Wall street can make money betting the economy will tank. Wall street makes money up, or down. That is why trump is worth $10B and bloomberg $38.5B.


hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 22, 2015, 06:11:23 PM
Why Wall Street Loves Hillary

She's trying to sound populist, but the banks are ready to shower her campaign with cash.


By William D. Cohan
November 11, 2014



An odd thing happened last month when, stumping just before the midterms, Hillary Clinton came in close proximity to the woman who has sometimes been described as the conscience of the Democratic Party. Speaking at the Park Plaza Hotel in Boston as she did her part to try to rescue the failing gubernatorial campaign of Martha Coakley in Massachusetts, Clinton paid deference to Senator Elizabeth Warren, the anti-Wall Street firebrand who has accused Clinton of pandering to the big banks, and who was sitting right there listening.

 “I love watching Elizabeth give it to those who deserve it,” Clinton said to cheers. But then, awkwardly, she appeared to try to out-Warren Warren—and perhaps build a bridge too far to the left—by uttering words she clearly did not believe: “Don’t let anyone tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs,” Clinton said, erroneously echoing a meme Warren made famous during an August 2011 speech at a home in Andover, Massachusetts. “You know that old theory, trickle-down economics? That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”

The right went wild. See? Hillary Clinton has finally shown her hand. After having sat out the financial crisis and all the economic turmoil that has followed in the past six years—and with good reason, since for most of that time she was tending to the nation’s diplomacy as secretary of state—she is proving to be an anti-Wall Street populist too, and as much a socialist as her former boss, President Obama.

But here’s the strange thing: Down on Wall Street they don’t believe it for a minute. While the finance industry does genuinely hate Warren, the big bankers love Clinton, and by and large they badly want her to be president. Many of the rich and powerful in the financial industry—among them, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman, Tom Nides, a powerful vice chairman at Morgan Stanley, and the heads of JPMorganChase and Bank of America—consider Clinton a pragmatic problem-solver not prone to populist rhetoric. To them, she’s someone who gets the idea that we all benefit if Wall Street and American business thrive. What about her forays into fiery rhetoric? They dismiss it quickly as political maneuvers. None of them think she really means her populism.

Although Hillary Clinton has made no formal announcement of her candidacy, the consensus on Wall Street is that she is running—and running hard—and that her national organization is quickly falling into place behind the scenes. That all makes her attractive. Wall Street, above all, loves a winner, especially one who is not likely to tamper too radically with its vast money pot.

According to a wide assortment of bankers and hedge-fund managers I spoke to for this article, Clinton’s rock-solid support on Wall Street is not anything that can be dislodged based on a few seemingly off-the-cuff comments in Boston calculated to protect her left flank. (For the record, she quickly walked them back, saying she had “short-handed” her comments about the failures of trickle-down economics by suggesting, absurdly, that corporations don’t create jobs.) “I think people are very excited about Hillary,” says one Wall Street investment professional with close ties to Washington. “Most people in New York on the finance side view her as being very pragmatic. I think they have confidence that she understands how things work and that she’s not a populist.”

The bottom line for Wall Street, says this executive—echoing many others—is that Clinton understands that America’s much-maligned financial industry wants to be part of the solution to the country’s problems. “Everybody who makes money feels a shared responsibility,” he continues. “Everybody sort of looks at her with a lot of optimism because they feel she doesn’t mind making hard decisions. She’ll do what she needs to do, but it’s not a ‘Let me blame you.’ It’s, ‘Hey, here’s what you’ve got to do.’ And I think that’s very different.” During a speech last December at the Conrad Hotel, in New York, her message could not have been more different from Obama’s hot, anti-Wall Street rhetoric: “We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it.”
 
During the 2012 presidential election, Wall Street felt burned by Obama’s rhetoric and regulatory positions and overwhelmingly supported with their money Republican candidate Mitt Romney, co-founder of private-equity firm Bain Capital. Now, though, there’s a significant momentum back behind the Democratic contest. “The money is already behind her,” the Wall Street money manager says. “I don’t think it’s starting to line up behind her: It’s there for her if she wants it.”

The informal head of her informal Wall Street outreach effort for her informal campaign is a finance executive she knows well—and recruited to work for her at the State Department. Tom Nides, 53, the Morgan Stanley executive, knows both New York and Washington intimately. Today he speaks with Clinton regularly and has begun to play the role of gatekeeper on Wall Street to her embryonic campaign. He also has been known to run interference between the Obama administration and the leaders of the Israeli government, in order to try to patch up their dysfunctional relationship. “Tom at the end of the day is the guy—she trusts him, she knows him,” says the Wall Street investment manager.

Nides returned to Morgan Stanley in 2013 after two years working for Clinton at the State Department as deputy secretary of state for management and resources. Nides (with whom I once shared a one-week summer rental on Nantucket) epitomizes the revolving door that has long existed between Washington and Wall Street. Born in Duluth, Minnesota, he served in a senior leadership role for a diverse group of Washington politicians, from Representatives Tony Coehlo and Tom Foley to, as chief of staff, Mickey Kantor, Bill Clinton’s U.S. trade representative. He worked at Fannie Mae for six years, ran Joe Lieberman’s 2000 vice-presidential campaign and served a brief stint as CEO of Burson Marsteller, the public relations firm.

In 2001, Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack took Nides under his wing. When Mack was named CEO of Credit Suisse, Nides went along with him as chief administrative officer. When Mack returned to Morgan Stanley as CEO in 2005, Nides accompanied him again as chief operating officer and then stayed another year serving in the same role for James Gorman. Then Nides returned to Washington to work for then-Secretary Clinton at the State Department, replacing Jack Lew, who became head of the Office of Management and Budget. Many thought Nides’ time at Morgan Stanley was over, especially with Mack’s retirement at the end of 2011. But Gorman—also a Hillary supporter—surprised people by bringing Nides back to the firm as a vice-chairman.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/11/why-wall-street-loves-hillary-112782#ixzz3mVnl0B76


full member
Activity: 136
Merit: 100
Get your filthy fiat off me you damn dirty state.
September 22, 2015, 05:58:36 PM
Quote
But other sources claimed Clinton has suffered three secret strokes, according to the report, and it seems to be taking a toll. Out on the campaign trail, another close source said, "behind the scenes she appears exhausted, dazed and confused at times." Her most trusted aide, Huma Abedin, even sleeps in her hotel room to keep an eye on her "in case there's a medical emergency," the insider claimed.

http://radaronline.com/photos/hillary-clinton-president-multiple-sclerosis-disease-series-strokes-report-claims/photo/1186651/
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 05:13:02 PM
Donald Trump leads the Republican primary field with 34 percent support

hmm, any odds on when he´ll get whacked by a lone gunman? It seems to me that he´s the only participant of consequence in this reality show that doesn´t need immediate treatment by men in white coats in rooms with rubber walls.


D+media and R, are trying hard to take him out. If this happens for real the fbi will take years to find out whodunnit . Multiple decades even.



Well, can´t say I´m a fan and he´s probably a scumbag but I doubt that he´s crazy. So, I´m not surprised that he´s top of the field there. A sane scumbag would be the best on offer for decades. Hope he has very competent security. Good luck, g


The cure may not taste good. The treatment may make you lose your hair. Facing dire future you take what will save you, not something untrustworthy and vile...


 
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 22, 2015, 04:14:22 PM
Donald Trump leads the Republican primary field with 34 percent support

hmm, any odds on when he´ll get whacked by a lone gunman? It seems to me that he´s the only participant of consequence in this reality show that doesn´t need immediate treatment by men in white coats in rooms with rubber walls.


D+media and R, are trying hard to take him out. If this happens for real the fbi will take years to find out whodunnit . Multiple decades even.



Well, can´t say I´m a fan and he´s probably a scumbag but I doubt that he´s crazy. So, I´m not surprised that he´s top of the field there. A sane scumbag would be the best on offer for decades. Hope he has very competent security. Good luck, g
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 03:57:44 PM
Donald Trump leads the Republican primary field with 34 percent support

hmm, any odds on when he´ll get whacked by a lone gunman? It seems to me that he´s the only participant of consequence in this reality show that doesn´t need immediate treatment by men in white coats in rooms with rubber walls.


D+media and R, are trying hard to take him out. If this happens for real the fbi will take years to find out whodunnit . Multiple decades even.

hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
September 22, 2015, 02:21:05 PM
Donald Trump leads the Republican primary field with 34 percent support

hmm, any odds on when he´ll get whacked by a lone gunman? It seems to me that he´s the only participant of consequence in this reality show that doesn´t need immediate treatment by men in white coats in rooms with rubber walls.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 01:43:06 PM



Hillary Clinton Viewed Unfavorably by Majority of NYers for First Time Ever




Hillary Clinton is viewed unfavorably by more New Yorkers (51 percent) than those who have a favorable view of her (46 percent) for the first time ever, down from 56-40 percent positive in July, according to a new Siena College poll of New York State registered voters released today. While a majority of Democrats say that Vice President Joe Biden should run for President, in a potential primary matchup Clinton is supported by 45 percent of Democrats, compared to 24 percent for Biden and 23 percent for Senator Bernie Sanders.

Donald Trump leads the Republican primary field with 34 percent support, followed by Ben Carson (14 percent) and Jeb Bush (11 percent) and everyone else in single digits. Although Trump is viewed favorably by 60 percent of Republicans – the highest of any of the candidates – he is viewed unfavorably by 65 percent of all New York voters, also the highest of any candidate.

“For the first time ever, Hillary Clinton is under water with New York voters, facing her worst favorability rating ever in her adopted home state. Her favorability rating has seen a net drop of 21 points since July,” said Siena College pollster Steven Greenberg.

“While still overwhelmingly popular with Democrats, 70-27 percent, Clinton is viewed unfavorably by 86 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of independents. She is viewed unfavorably by at least 60 percent of all upstate and downstate suburban voters, as well as among men and white voters,” Greenberg said.



https://www.siena.edu/news-events/article/hillary-clinton-viewed-unfavorably-by-majority-of-nyers-for-first-time-ever


legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 10:57:05 AM



Grassley blasts FBI over Clinton emails

"The FBI is behaving like it’s above the law."


Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is blasting the FBI for rebuffing a judge's request for information on the law enforcement agency's investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email system.....


If there is anyone left who Trusts Hillary, please stand up.

Is this an extinct species?

We are concerned.


I do my best to have them stand out with my yellow hi-liter, every time they show up here. That's the least I can do...

 Cool


legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 12:21:35 AM



Grassley blasts FBI over Clinton emails

"The FBI is behaving like it’s above the law."


Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is blasting the FBI for rebuffing a judge's request for information on the law enforcement agency's investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email system.

Grassley, whose panel oversees the FBI, reacted sharply to a letter the FBI sent Monday turning aside U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan's request for information on whether investigators have been able to retrieve records from a backup thumb drive of Clinton emails or from a server turned over by a tech company Clinton hired.

"The FBI is behaving like it’s above the law," Grassley said in a statement provided to POLITICO on Monday evening. "Simply refusing to cooperate with a court-ordered request is not an appropriate course of action. This entire case, from Secretary Clinton’s ill-advised decision to use a non-government email server, to the FBI’s investigation about classified information, needs some transparency in order to assure the American people that getting to the bottom of this controversy is a priority.”

Grassley, who has been investigating aspects of the email controversy and State's personnel practices, did not elaborate on what steps his committee might take. It's also unclear whether the judge involved or other judges handling similar cases might take more emphatic action, like directly ordering the FBI to cooperate.

About a month ago, Sullivan asked the State Department to reach out to the FBI for assistance in addressing a Freedom of Information Act request by the conservative group Judicial Watch regarding Clinton aide Huma Abedin's employment arrangements. The judge also asked State to report on arrangements for the FBI to share information about the ongoing investigation.

In a terse letter Monday, FBI General Counsel James Baker appeared to reject the request .

"At this time, consistent with long-standing Department of Justice and FBI policy, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation, nor are we in a position to provide additional information at this time," Baker wrote to senior State Department attorney Mary McLeod.

DOJ confirmed in July that it received a referral from the Intelligence Community inspector general regarding possible compromise of classified information in Clinton's email account. The agency initially said the referral was criminal, but later said it was not and that it was sent under a counterintelligence law regarding possible breaches involving national security secrets.


http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/fbi-rejects-judges-request-for-clinton-email-info-213889



legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 22, 2015, 12:15:17 AM



FBI refuses to cooperate in Hillary Clinton email server probe







The FBI refused to cooperate Monday with a court-ordered inquiry into former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s email server, telling the State Department that they won’t even confirm they are investigating the matter themselves, much less willing to tell the rest of the government what’s going on.

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan had ordered the State Department to talk with the FBI and see what sort of information could be recovered from Mrs. Clinton’s email server, which her lawyer has said she turned over to the Justice Department over the summer.

The FBI’s refusal, however, leaves things muddled.

“At this time, consistent with long-standing Department of Justice and FBI policy, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation, nor are we in a position to provide additional information at this time,” FBI General Counsel James A. Baker wrote in a letter dated Monday — a week after the deadline the Justice Department had set for the FBI to reply.

Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest law firm that is pursuing at least 16 open records cases seeking emails from Mrs. Clinton and her top aides, said at this point it’s not even clear what Mrs. Clinton provided, since all that’s been made public at this point are the former secretary of state’s public comments and some assertions, made through her lawyer, to the State Department.

Judicial Watch is prodding the courts to try to delve more deeply into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and the group said a number of questions persevere about both Mrs. Clinton and top aides such as Huma Abedin, who did public business on an account tied to the server Mrs. Clinton maintained.

“We still do not know whether the FBI — or any other government agency for that matter — has possession of the email server that was used by Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin to conduct official government business during their four years of employment at the State Department,” Judicial Watch said.

“We also do not know whether the server purportedly in the possession of the FBI — an assumption based on unsworn statements by third parties — is the actual email server that was used by Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin to conduct official government business during their four years of employment at the State Department or whether it is a copy of such an email server. Nor do we know whether any copies of the email server or copies of the records from the email server exist,” the group said in its own court filing Monday afternoon.

Judicial Watch did release more than 50 pages Monday of emails it obtained from Ms. Abedin’s account on Mrs. Clinton’s server, and said it was clear she was talking about “sensitive” topics that shouldn’t have been discussed on an insecure account.

Many of those were details of Mrs. Clinton’s movements overseas, such as hotels she was staying at.

“These emails Judicial Watch forced out through a federal lawsuit show that Huma Abedin used her separate clintonemail.com account to conduct the most sensitive government business, endangering not only her safety but the safety of Hillary Clinton and countless others,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

He questioned what reason Ms. Abedin — who did maintain an account, [email protected], on State.gov servers — would have for using the other account for important business. Mrs. Clinton said she kept only one account, the one on the clintonemail.com server, because it was more convenient, but that reasoning does not appear to apply to Ms. Abedin.

The State Department is making all of Mrs. Clinton’s emails public under order of Judge Rudolph Contreras. But the department has said it won’t make all of the emails public from Ms. Abedin or other top Clinton aides Cheryl Mills or Philippe Reines. Instead the department only plans to release those messages specifically requested in open records demands.

Mrs. Clinton turned over about 30,000 email messages in December, while her aides turned over more than 100,000 pages between them, with the final set only being returned, by Ms. Abedin, earlier this month, the department said in court filings.

Without those documents in hand, the State Department has been unable to do full and complete searches in response to subpoenas, congressional inquiries or Freedom of Information Act requests.

The State Department has asked for dozens of cases to be put on hold while it tries to get a single judge to coordinate all of its searches in more than two dozen cases. But the people requesting the records have objected, and say the State Department has nobody to blame but itself.

“The State Department acts as if Ms. Abedin’s and Ms. Mills’ documents fell from the sky on the eve of the State Department’s production deadline, but that is not remotely the case,” Citizens United, one of the plaintiffs who has sued under the FOIA, said in a filing late last week.

Citizens United says the State Department missed its own deadline for producing Ms. Mills’ and Ms. Abedin’s documents.

The Obama administration countered that it went above and beyond its duties under the law by asking Ms. Abedin and Ms. Mills to return their records and then to search them in response to open records requests. The State Department says it’s moving as quickly as possible, but says the sheer number of documents — and the number of requests for them — calls for a stay in most cases.

But of the 26 requests where the State Department has sought to halt proceedings, six have already been denied. Only one has been granted, one was granted in part and denied in part by the same judge, and another is being held in abeyance.

The State Department told one of the federal judges Monday that it’s facing nearly 100 different open records lawsuits — not all of them related to Mrs. Clinton’s email server — that have stretched officials to their limit.

Monday’s FBI letter underscores the tangled situation Mrs. Clinton’s emails have produced. The letter was addressed to Mary McLeod, a lawyer at the Justice Department, which oversees the FBI — and which means, in effect, that the FBI is refusing to talk to its own parent department about the matter.

Mr. Baker pointedly noted in his letter that he was aware the response would be submitted to the court, which would presumably make it public.

Earlier this month the Justice Department, in another pleading, insisted Mrs. Clinton didn’t do anything wrong in being the one who decided which of her messages were official business records that must be returned to the government and which were purely personal and able to be expunged.

Judicial Watch said that raises thorny questions for a department that is supposedly investigating Mrs. Clinton.

Last week Sen. John Cornyn, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, called for Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch to name a special counsel to oversee the investigation, citing too many potential conflicts of interest.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/21/hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-refuses-cooperate-serve/?page=2



----------------------------------------
Corruption. All. The. Way. Up.



legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
September 17, 2015, 05:45:40 PM







Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, has offered specific positions on a variety of issues while campaigning. But when Gallup recently asked Americans to say what they recall reading or hearing about her, one word — “email” — drowned out everything else.

[…]

In the verbatim responses from about 750 U.S. adults familiar enough with Clinton to offer an opinion of her, the word “email” came up 329 times, phrased variously as “email,” “emails,” “email scandal,” “email scandals,” “that email thing,” “email stuff” and “private emails.” Relatedly, there were 83 mentions of “server.” All of these refer to the controversy involving Clinton’s use of private email servers to conduct government business while she was secretary of state.

By contrast, there were few mentions of the substantive themes Clinton has talked about on the campaign trail. For example, “economy” appeared on the list only four times, the same number as for “the middle class.” “Gun control” appeared seven times, with even fewer mentions of “college” and “capital gains tax.” Even the catchall descriptions “policy” or “policies” were mentioned just nine times.

[…]

The data suggest that Clinton has not been able to control the messaging about her and her candidacy, given that the email controversy is the information about her that has been most likely to filter through to the average American.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/185486/email-defines-clinton-immigration-defines-trump.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication



newbie
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
September 16, 2015, 07:02:54 PM
She does seem kind of shady, I'll say that much.  She seems to have been kind of on the down low lately but they haven't started Democratic debates either yet so that may be part of it. She is a politician though so kind of like others here have said, by being a politician it already brings your trust level down a bit.
Pab
legendary
Activity: 1862
Merit: 1012
September 16, 2015, 04:44:26 PM
 For me any politician from any country is not trustworthy,but if she will be elected mr Putin will eat her on breakfest
Pages:
Jump to: