Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 69. (Read 234761 times)

Who do you think is more likely to cry when Hillary is finally arrested, her or Bill?

Right. Bill.


It’s not just the e-mails they’re looking at potentially. Now that they have the server, they should be able to tell how many different users were accessing it, including unauthorized users. Which is to say, even if it can’t be proved that Hillary herself knowingly transmitted classified information in an insecure manner — not the criminal standard of culpability but the moral standard she’ll claim in doing damage control — the feds might be able to tell if foreign spies were reading her e-mail. It’ll be fun watching her on the trail trying to sell herself as the experienced adult in the room on national security when the papers are full of stories about the Chinese or Russians reading Top Secret documents right over her shoulder. At a minimum, the feds should be able to glean just how thorough her security protocols were. Did she do everything in her power to impede outside access into the system? The early bets on that are … not in her favor.

Another key question: When, precisely, was the server wiped? PolitiFact addressed that question last month and the closest it came to an answer was sometime in the fall of 2014, after the State Department had asked her for her work-related correspondence and she sent them a batch of e-mails in reply. Is that true, or did she actually wipe it much later, perhaps after Trey Gowdy subpoenaed her in March demanding that she produce all correspondence related to the Benghazi attack? If the answer is “after” then we have obstruction of justice in the form of destroying records to avoid compliance with a lawful demand. In fact, even if the answer is “before,” you could argue that we have obstruction of justice anyway. Law prof Ronald Rotunda made a compelling case back in March that if Hillary had reason to believe her e-mails might be subpoenaed eventually, then destroying them would make her guilty of anticipatory obstruction of justice. You shouldn’t be allowed to evade punishment, after all, just because you’re quick off the block in erasing damaging material while the authorities are still drawing up subpoenas and search warrants. If it turns out the server was wiped much later than we thought, when she clearly had reason to believe congressional investigators and even the FBI might have interest in it, she might be cooked.

Exit question: Why didn’t she have the server physically destroyed after she left the State Department so that nothing would be recoverable? For that matter, why didn’t she purge her archives and replace the server periodically, precisely so that she could claim it was a normal business practice if/when the feds came calling? The weirdest thing about this scandal is how haphazard Hillary’s behavior was throughout. She took a huge risk to begin with by putting her correspondence on an insecure private server, knowing that spies would be eager to infiltrate it, but instead of shelling out big bucks for the best security money could buy, she ran the operation out of her basement and then turned the old server over to a small mom-and-pop shop in the midwest. I would have thought the Clintons would hire their own white-hat hackers to defend their system from invasive attacks 24/7 and then run the latest server through an industrial shredder every year or so to make sure any data is good and gone. I don’t get it.


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/18/oh-yes-sources-tell-nbc-that-fbi-is-optimistic-it-can-recover-data-from-hillarys-wiped-server/

FBI Optimistic It Can Recover Some Data From Clinton Server



The FBI may be able to recover at least some data from Hillary Clinton's private email server even though there was an attempt to wipe it, two sources with direct knowledge of the process told NBC News on Tuesday.

The FBI is investigating the security of Clinton's personal server and the thumb drives that contain emails related to her work as secretary of state during President Barack Obama's first term. The Clinton campaign has previously acknowledged that there was an attempt to wipe the server before it was turned over last week to the FBI.


The FBI "will try to figure what's there, how it got there and who put it there," one of the sources said.


A team of intelligence community reviewers also looking at emails from the server have identified 305 documents that have been referred to their agencies for further consultation, State Department lawyers said in a court filing Tuesday intended to update a federal judge on efforts to release the emails.



http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/hillary-clinton/fbi-optimistic-it-can-recover-some-data-clinton-server-n411976




----------------------------------
Next time hillary, through the hard drives in there:






 

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary's email firm was run from a loft apartment with its servers in the BATHROOM, raising new questions over security of sensitive messages she held


Democrat White House front runner used Platte River Networks of Denver, Colorado, to maintain her controversial 'home brew' server

Up to 60 emails with classified material have been found in a sample of those she did not delete - meaning there could be many more

Now Daily Mail Online reveals new questions over security of her emails when Platte River was involved in maintaining server

'Mom and pop' firm used converted residential apartment and had its own servers in a bathroom closet

Links between 'local' IT company and Clinton remain unclear but its VP of sales and marketing, who was sued for 'fraud' is said to be 'big Democrat'






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3201367/Hillary-s-email-firm-run-loft-apartment-servers-BATHROOM-raising-new-questions-security-sensitive-messages-held.html

She was the perfect crook, with the longest con ever... Until the rodeo clown pulled the rug under her feet in 2008... Now she looks like the very rug that was under her feet...

I mean no disrespect to rugs and carpets, including the flying ones...

Don't worry.

If you want your liars you can keep them.

And if you like your lying lies, you can keep them too.

Clinton Email Scandal: A Long National Nightmare Looms



Corruption: The Hillary Clinton email scandal has become the Watergate of our time. But there's a significant difference. This time, America has a chance to stop a suspected crook from taking office.

The Watergate scandal was, in the words of President Ford "a long national nightmare." A sitting president was accused of being a party to illegal activity and covering it up. Ultimately he had to resign from office, the only president to do so.

Today we have a Democratic candidate who trails scandal behind her the way a dirt cloud follows the Peanuts character Pig Pen wherever he goes.

And though she leads the second-place candidate by a wide — 32.5 points — margin, a margin so large that it seems there's no way she won't be the Democrats' nominee, she is still outside the White House.

Unless we want another long national nightmare dragging down a president, this is where she should stay.

Like Watergate, Clinton's email scandal started slowly before it became a boulder rolling downhill. Now there's a fresh revelation nearly every day. Here are some of the crucial facts known through Monday:

• Clinton had a personal email account that she used for State Department business.

• That account was based in a private server located in the Clintons' Chappaqua, N.Y., compound.

• The server was professionally wiped clean before investigators were able to obtain it.

• At least 305 emails on Clinton's private account potentially contain classified material, and it's safe to say more like them will be found.

• At least two of the emails had top secret material.

• The FBI is conducting a criminal probe into the emails.

• Clinton's former chief of staff Cheryl Mills threatened to violate a court order and delete State Department emails.

• Clinton aide Huma Abedin had an email account on the Clinton server and exchanged government emails with Clinton on their private accounts.

• Abedin has family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Given these facts, the Democrats need to ask themselves some hard questions:

• Do they want to stay behind a candidate who will be under investigation throughout the campaign?

• Do they still want to support a candidate who would start her term as president under investigation?

• Do they want to continue supporting a candidate for whom a Republican House would be drawing up articles of impeachment at the very moment she's taking the oath of office?

• Do they want a Democratic president who, after risking national security while secretary of state, shouldn't be allowed to have a security clearance?

The Democrats have the choice: They can stay with Clinton or move on to another candidate who doesn't have the scandal baggage she would empty on the Oval Office floor. That candidate is less likely to be elected, but also less likely to bring shame on the party and create a historical headache for the nation.

This really isn't a hard decision.


http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/081715-766902-democrats-can-avoid-long-national-nightmare-by-dumping-clinton.htm

State Department Turns Up Over 81,000 Emails From Top Hillary Clinton Aide They Swore Didn’t Exist…





State Department officials have uncovered thousands of emails between Philippe Reines, a top Hillary Clinton aide, and members of the media, they previously said did not exist.

In a court filing last Thursday, the State Department estimated that a recent search turned up more than 81,000 emails from Reines’s official account while at the State Department. And 17,855 potentially fall within a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by Gawker earlier this year.

That is a reversal from 2013, when the State Department said a thorough search turned up no responsive records for Gawker’s request. In 2012, Gawker requested all emails between Reines and reporters from 34 media outlets.

The State Department did not explain the reversal in the court document, nor did it return a request for comment.

It will begin releasing a tranche of Reines’s emails by the end of September.

After it was revealed earlier this year that Clinton, and potentially some of her aides, used personal email accounts for official business, Gawker sued the State Department over its initial request for communications between Reines and reporters.


http://thehill.com/policy/technology/251297-in-reversal-state-turns-up-thousands-of-emails-from-top-clinton-aide

Clinton campaign reverts back to old ways (video)

The Washington Post's Karen Tumulty explains how the email controversy has caused Hillary Clinton to revert back to secrecy when she had originally promised an open campaign.


http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/clinton-campaign-reverts-back-to-old-ways-506658371822

That is why I stand for "Orange is the new black" for hillary...

 

Better question; Who is trustworthy? This is why I stand for democracy, however 9 out of 10 times this system is rigged as well. The system that I'd like has yet to be made.

IT Firm Who Maintained Hillary’s Server: “Highly Likely A Full Backup Was Made” And Deleted Emails “May Still Exist”





Platte River Networks, the Denver-based cybersecurity firm Hillary Clinton hired in 2013 to maintain her old email server, says it is “highly likely” a full backup of the device was made and that the thousands of emails Clinton deleted may still exist, ABC News is reporting.

On Wednesday, Platte River gave the FBI the server Clinton used as secretary of state. The Democratic presidential candidate had stated numerous times prior to that that she would not relinquish control of the server to a third party.

But the FBI became interested in the hardware after the revelation that the Intelligent Community inspector general had determined that two emails that traversed the server contained “top secret” information. While Clinton is not believed to have sent the emails in question, the finding undermines her claims at the onset of the email scandal in March that no classified information ever landed on her server.


http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/16/report-highly-likely-that-theres-a-full-backup-of-hillarys-email-server-video/

Backers fear old weaknesses stalk Clinton campaign





It was supposed to be different this time. After the wounds of 2008, many of them self-inflicted, Hillary Rodham Clinton rebooted for 2016 with a new message, new advisers and new energy.

But two dynamics have crystallized this month, suggesting the New Hillary is hobbled by old weaknesses. Once again, worried supporters see signs of a bunker mentality in response to bad news about her e-mail server and other controversies, and they see a candidate who can seem strangely blinkered to the threat posed by a lesser-known challenger.

“A lot of the people who were hired by the campaign were new to the Clintons,” said a prominent Democrat who counts both Hillary Clinton and former president Bill Clinton as friends. “I kind of assumed it would be different. But it hasn’t changed.”

That Democrat and other supporters requested anonymity in order to discuss the shortcomings of a candidate whom they still overwhelmingly support and think can win the White House. Several supporters said that while no one is pulling the fire alarm, they see worrisome patterns emerging.

Among them: insularity, rigidity and a sense that the operation is tone-deaf to changes happening around it.

The concerns come as Hillary Clinton is weakened by forces both within and outside her control, allies outside the campaign said. And if her campaign is doing some things well — raising money and organizing in early states — Clinton has not been able to shake off basic questions about her skills as a candidate.

Her campaign has been slow off the mark in responding to the surprising surge in national support for Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, several Democrats said. That’s one reason Vice President Biden and his allies are pondering a challenge to Clinton.

Meanwhile, the confusing saga of Clinton’s private e-mail system took what many Democrats saw as a chilling turn last week, with more news about the FBI’s investigation into the potential mishandling of classified material on Clinton’s home computer server. Clinton is not the target of the investigation but, in the words of one Democrat, no one wants their candidate’s name in the same sentence as “FBI.”

Clinton the fighter
One Democrat with past experience in presidential campaigns said Clinton and her advisers need to be risk-takers.

“They need to show her being bold and being a fighter and breaking out of this carefully constructed, opportunistic package that people think she is,” said another Democrat.

“There’s clearly emotion out there and she’s just not going anywhere near it, and she needs to find a way to.”

Her campaign staff protests that they are doing just that and cautions that any freak-out is vastly premature.

“We’re spending the next two weeks on pretty intensive political education” among supporters, said communications director Jennifer Palmieri. “Explain the facts, but also the political context that they have to look at this through. We’ll handle it. Fight back.”

Clinton has been feistier on the stump lately, delivering a partisan barn-burner of a speech to Iowa Democrats on Friday night. She framed the e-mail issue as part of a sustained Republican attack on everything Clinton.

“It’s not about e-mails or servers,” Clinton said. “It’s about politics.”

She pledged to “do my part to provide transparency to Americans,” but she skimmed over the messy details, including the fact, reported by The Washington Post, that she did not turn over her private server and a thumb drive containing her e-mails until after the Justice Department asked for them two weeks ago.

“I won’t get down in the mud with them,” Clinton said. “I won’t pretend that this is anything other than what it is — the same old partisan games we’ve seen so many times before.”

The echoes of the old “vast right-wing conspiracy” that she once said was out to get her and President Clinton were hard to miss, and the crowd at the annual “Wing Ding” dinner ate it up.

Hillary Clinton has not taken on Sanders directly, and she deferentially says Biden’s choice should be his to make. Her campaign says she will confront Sanders in due time, and certainly at the first Democratic debate in October, and is up to the challenge of both a primary and a general election fight.

“You can’t take this woman down,” Palmieri said. “On most days she has 19 candidates attacking her. I doubt that any other candidate on either side could withstand that kind of incoming as well.”

A change in the air
Still, saving all her firepower for Republicans leaves Clinton open to criticism from her own partisans that she is misreading the primary terrain.

Clinton designed a strategy founded on economic populism. Clinton argues that she has the experience and the temperament to be a champion for those who feel left out of a changing economic landscape and an imperfect economic recovery.

Sanders and Republican Donald Trump are tapping into something related but more visceral — a grass-roots, antiestablishment anger that is hard for Clinton to address with wonky policy prescriptions.

That may not be her fault, supporters said, but they want to see her acknowledge and adjust for it.

Another Democrat, also a veteran of presidential politics, said what the campaign needs is a more intense approach rather than a total overhaul. Clinton has campaigned episodically and often in controlled environments but not for sustained periods in more free-form settings.

“What do you do about the restiveness” among Democrats? the strategist asked. “The answer is you plunge in” by campaigning hard and doing so face-to-face with voters.

Democrats not directly involved in the Clinton campaign agreed that many of her events lack energy and emotion at a time when voters are responding to the blunt rabble-rousing messages of Sanders or Trump.

Many criticized the roundtable discussions Clinton is fond of holding as stilted and artificial, although some have yielded lively discussions of race, gun violence and drug addiction, among other topics.

What she needs, outside critics said, are events where she can show greater spontaneity.

Such agility is what her campaign advisers promised when they began in the spring, and it’s what Sanders appears to be showing now.

‘Unprecedented headwinds’
The Clinton campaign has sought to address supporters’ concerns about the Sanders threat and the e-mail issue, holding quiet sessions with influential Democrats over the past two weeks and distributing reassuring messages via e-mail.

Senior campaign officials have met with Democrats at the campaign headquarters in Brooklyn and in Washington. They have also made calls to what the campaign refers to as “talkers,” or partisans who talk to reporters or appear on television.

“Like any presidential campaign, we face our share of challenges,” campaign manager Robby Mook wrote in a “state of the race” memo distributed last week and obtained by The Post.

“In the face of these unprecedented headwinds, we’ve made a strategic decision to fight back and set the record straight,” Mook wrote.

His memo is mostly a recitation of what he identifies as the weaknesses and failings of the Republican field, plus an itemization of Clinton’s impressive fundraising, field organizing and social-media statistics. He stresses Clinton’s still-comfortable lead in national head-to-head polls against Republicans.

There is no direct mention of either the e-mail issue or Sanders’s summer surge, but Mook’s message is clear: There is no reason to panic.

“The fact remains, the Democratic primary will be competitive. History guarantees it,” Mook wrote.

Palmieri wrote to supporters after news last week that the FBI would take possession of the server Clinton had kept in her Chappaqua, N.Y., basement.

“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president,” Palmieri wrote. “We know it, Hillary knows it, and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day. It’s OK. We’ll be ready. We have the facts, our principles, and you on our side.”

The e-mail issue has dampened Clinton’s support in New Hampshire, which holds the nation’s first primary, on Feb. 9. Sanders rose to a statistical tie there in the latest statewide poll, to the shock of some longtime Clinton backers. She is on safer ground in Iowa, which will hold the nation’s first presidential selection vote in the Feb. 1 caucuses.

Democrats in Washington fret that the e-mail liability is something Clinton brought on herself and has managed from a defensive crouch. The decision to operate a separate e-mail system parallel to the regular State Department system has resulted in an investigation that is now out of the control of Clinton and her campaign advisers.

Political strategists who have been through past such episodes note that an investigation like this can go in unexpected and damaging directions.

“I don’t think there’s a big smoking gun,” one Democrat said. “But it’s hard to explain why you had a private server, why you just now turned it over. . . . Shouldn’t you have had better judgment?”

Echoes of scandals past
The e-mail issue also recalls scandals of Clintonworld past and involves some of the same players, such as longtime Clinton attorney and confidant David Kendall.

Kendall has negotiated with congressional Republicans over access to Clinton’s e-mails and her forthcoming congressional testimony. Clinton entrusted him with a portable computer storage drive containing copies of her work-related e-mails.

Clinton and Kendall share a penchant for secrecy and a resistance to disclosure. But the best legal strategy is not always the best political one, Democrats said.

“She gave up her server,” one seasoned Democratic operative said. “Think how good it would have been if she had done it five months ago.”

Underlying that concern is an itchy sense among some Democrats that however skilled and capable Clinton and her husband are politically, they carry baggage that is hard to shake off. Every new controversy is a reminder that this is part of what comes with the Clintons.

“Getting out there and passionately campaigning and interacting with people in a genuine way is how you combat that,” said a Democratic strategist. “I think the absence of presence out there creates a vacuum in which these kinds of questions metastasize.”

The e-mail issue plays directly to public doubts about Clinton’s honesty, trustworthiness and judgment.

Clinton had said in March that she would not relinquish control of the server but relented last week. Clinton has also been forced to amend her initial blanket statement that she never sent any classified material over the home-based server while she was secretary of state. She now maintains that she never sent material that was labeled classified at the time.

Even Democrats who critique the Clinton campaign, however, say she remains formidable, both in the primary and in a general election.

“She’s still in a very, very strong position,” another strategist said. “I don’t think we’re in a free-fall situation here.”


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-campaign-same-old-problems-clinton-hurt-by-familiar-shortcomings/2015/08/15/ce80e2d8-42ad-11e5-8ab4-c73967a143d3_story.html

YOU DICK you have no clue about the life around you..
YOU ARE A RACIST HOMOPHOBIC PLANT POT.
YOU KNOW EF ALL
Your parents need a boot up the ass for bringing you up this way CUNT
pardon the language but you are a horrible TWAT

100% she will win
happy days

Number of Hillary Clinton’s emails flagged for classified data grows to 60 as review continues








While media coverage has focused on a half-dozen of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal emails containing sensitive intelligence, the total number of her private emails identified by an ongoing State Department review as having contained classified data has ballooned to 60, officials told The Washington Times.

That figure is current through the end of July and is likely to grow as officials wade through a total of 30,000 work-related emails that passed through her personal email server, officials said. The process is expected to take months.

The 60 emails are among those that have been reviewed and cleared for release under the Freedom of Information Act as part of a open-records lawsuit. Some of the emails have multiple redactions for classified information.

Among the first 60 flagged emails, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times.

Those 60 emails do not include two emails identified in recent days by Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III as containing “top-secret” information possibly derived from Pentagon satellites, drones or intercepts, which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets.

State officials and the intelligence community are working to resolve questions about those and other emails with possible classified information, a process that isn’t likely to be completed until January.

That will be right around the time Mrs. Clinton is slated to face voters in the Iowa caucuses in her bid for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

As the number of suspect emails grows and the classification review continues, it is clear that predictions contained in a notification Mr. McCullough sent Congress this summer is likely to hold true: Mrs. Clinton’s personal emails likely contained hundreds of disclosures of classified information.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/16/number-of-hillary-clintons-emails-flagged-for-clas/

-----------------------------
He can taste it...

The few things I know about her scream any one else but then I hear Al Gore thinking about running and I contemplate the two heads of the same beast.
Maybe Vice President Decaprio would be interesting,a some what parade of super models in the White House.

She scares me and really do not like any of the potential winners.

If Your Name Isn't Hillary, the Hammer for Mishandling Secrets
The double standard is obvious, says a former diplomat pounded by Clinton State Department.






Peter Van Buren can’t wait for the court-ordered release of Hillary Clinton’s work emails from 2011, a nearly ruinous year for him that resulted in a negotiated retirement from the State Department.

The foreign affairs arm of the federal government, then led by Clinton, had accused the longtime foreign service officer of mishandling classified information and unsuccessfully asked the Justice Department to prosecute him.

Van Buren says his travails demonstrate a double standard at the State Department, which now defends Clinton’s use of a private email system that this week was revealed to contain highly classified top secret information.

At the same time Clinton, now the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, was using her private and apparently unsecure email system, Van Buren lost his security clearance and then his job as a result of what he views as false allegations of mishandling information that wasn't secret at all.


The problems began in late 2010 when Van Buren wrote a book titled “We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People.” He submitted it to the department for prepublication review and, after a mandatory waiting period in 2011, it was shipped to bookstores. Just before it hit the shelves, his publisher was urged to hit the brakes.

There were three allegedly classified details, the department claimed about the book poised to sharply criticize U.S. diplomatic efforts. The details including mention that an unnamed CIA officer who had worked in Iraq and Afghanistan had also worked in Somalia, that the CIA controlled the budget of Iraqi intelligence services – a rehash, the author says, of mainstream press reporting – and that the CIA had once worked with Saddam Hussein.

Van Buren's publisher concluded the contested passages “clearly did not contain classified information” and brushed off the threat without legal consequences.

Then a ton of bricks fell on Van Buren. His security clearance was suspended. His access to State Department facilities was restricted. He was essentially unable to work. The reason he was given, he recalls, was that he linked to a WikiLeaks cable on his personal blog.

The cable, with the low classification "confidential," recounted an apparently chummy visit that Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., had with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2009.

The State Department told Van Buren, a 24-year diplomat, in 2012 he was being fired.

The Washington Post reported eight alleged infractions, including linking to WikiLeaks on his blog, not clearing blog posts with the department, exhibiting a “lack of candor” with diplomatic security officers, allegedly leaking classified information in his book and showing “bad judgement” by criticizing Clinton and then-Rep. Michele Bachmann on his blog.

The revelation that the State Department’s diplomatic security branch requested Van Buren be prosecuted came later, after his negotiated exit.

Van Buren believes the emails in Clinton’s private server that contained highly classified information did not include documents, but the information itself, and that the State Department is being deceptive in making the true but incomplete statement that the messages “were not marked as classified” when they were sent, as spokesman John Kirby said Wednesday.

Low-level diplomats who do so much as leave a document of low classification on a guarded embassy desk, Van Buren says, risk demerits that jeopardize future job prospects.

“I cannot conceive any other person in government being able to do what she did without being punished,” he says. “Lots of people have lost their clearances, lost their jobs and in some cases lost their freedom and gone to jail” for allegedly being careless in protecting classified documents.

Van Buren isn't sure how closely Clinton followed his case, but he heard through the rumor mill that Clinton became aware of it in October 2011 when The New York Times reported on his book and State Department pushback.

The man he believes led the investigation into him, Van Buren says, reported to Clinton and “is not a bureaucrat who sticks his neck out unwisely, and he would not proceed in something as public as my case was without keeping her office informed.”

Mishandling classified documents often is alleged when authorities seek to punish embarrassing leaks to the press, but also appears in lesser-known cases, such as the prosecution of Arabic translator James Hitselberger, who was fired and criminally charged for printing two classified documents and attempting to leave a Bahrain naval base. He pleaded guilty to mishandling documents last year.



http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/08/14/if-your-name-isnt-hillary-the-hammer-for-mishandling-secrets



-----------------------------------------------------
She was the secretary of state... Server professionally wiped clean.

Do you have links of those polls?


Fox poll: Two percent of voters think Hillary told the truth about e-mail server — and only three percent of Democrats


[...]
A Fox News poll released Friday finds a 58 percent majority thinks Clinton “knowingly lied” when she announced in a March press conference that no emails on her private server contained classified information.  A third says there is “another explanation” for internal government investigators determining secret info was in fact on Clinton’s server (33 percent).

Moreover, by a 54-37 percent margin, voters feel Clinton put our national security at risk by using a private email server.


The poll gave three options: Clinton lied, There’s another explanation, and Clinton told the truth. Only 2% overall think Hillary told the truth, a staggeringly bad number, and only 33% overall think there’s another explanation than Hillary lying.  On option 3, the internals on this poll are instructive. The highest that Clinton told the truth polls in the demographics is 5% among black voters, where 63% choose another explanation. Among Democrats, the number is a whopping three percent. And among younger voters — who are presumably very familiar with e-mail — the “Hillary’s honest” option didn’t get enough responses to register.

Frankly, this question is designed to let respondents get off the hook for deciding whether Hillary lied or not. The middle option of another explanation implies incompetency — not exactly a good look for a presidential candidate — or some milder form of dishonesty. And yet, not many voters took the middle option. Self-described liberal, Democrats, and black voters all had majorities choosing the less-bad option, but almost none of them chose told the truth.

Instead, majorities in almost all other demos believe Hillary lied, even when given a softer option. Younger voters under 35 years of age were especially harsh on this judgment at 63/30/0, but the next age demo (35-54) was almost as dismissive, 61/31/2. In a rare show of consensus, those with (59/34/1) and without (58/33/2) college degrees agree on Hillary’s dishonesty. Two-thirds of independents believe she flat-out lied (67/23/2), and even a majority of women agree (51/40/2).


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/15/fox-poll-two-percent-of-voters-think-hillary-told-the-truth-about-e-mail-server-and-only-three-percent-of-democrats/


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The democrats have only one candidate: hillary. Of course they will vote for her, no matter what. The thing that's changing is... The law is catching to her, even if all of them are democrats. She needs to be president so she can pardon herself, then destroy anyone who went after her...

I am not surprised. Most of her support comes from people with low education, LGBT, radical feminists, African Americans, Hispanics.etc. These people just want a Democrat as the president. Even if Abu Bakr al Baghdadi becomes the democrat candidate for the 2016 POTUS elections, these guys will vote for him. So the secret behind her stable popularity figures is not that hard to find out.