Start by voting for them when you're not satisfied with the 2 Party candidates. The more votes other parties get, the more they matter. If no one votes for them, they don't matter. We have had 3rd party candidates that mattered somehwhat, made a dent, like Perot, Nader. We need more. Personally, I've voted 3rd party in Presidential elections more often than not. And I always vote on a lesser established party, if the candidate of my choice is a Major party candidate, and is on multiple lines.
It's also up to 3rd parties to give decent candidates. When The Libertarian party puts a joke and disgrace like Wayne Root on their ticket, they just bury themsleves deeper and deeper into irrelevancy.
[h=1]Latest Benghazi E-Mails Prove Clinton State Department Knew Attack Was Terrorism[/h]
she is utterly incompetent.
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/02/259...inton-state-department-knew-attack-terrorism/
she is utterly incompetent.
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/02/259...inton-state-department-knew-attack-terrorism/
Lawyer: Hillary Committed Felony if She Signed Disclosure Form
Wednesday, 11 Mar 2015 10:13 PM
By Greg Richter
Hillary Clinton said in a press conference on Tuesday that, "I fully complied with every rule that I was governed by" when serving as secretary of state.
But a Washington lawyer says that's not true if she signed the OF-109 form required of every State Department official, including the secretary, upon leaving office.
The form states that the signer has "surrendered to responsible officials all unclassified documents and papers relating to the official business of the government acquired while in the employ of the federal government."
Signing and not complying constitutes a false statement and is a felony, punishable by fines and/or prison time, said Shannen Coffin, a former assistant deputy U.S. attorney general, on Fox News Channel's "The Kelly File."
Clinton did not surrender her emails until two years after she left office.
"She didn't comply with the Federal Records Act," Coffin said. "And she clearly did not comply with her own records management handbook for the Department of State, which sets out a very specific process about how you remove records from the department's control."
Those rules require an exiting employee to "prepare an inventory of personal papers and nonrecord materials that you are proposing for removal" and then "request a review of those materials that you've proposed for removal."
A records official then sorts through through all records, including emails, at the time of departure to determine what is public and what is private, Coffin said.
The form itself warns that making a false statement is prosecutable, he said.
"Making a false statement in this context knowingly and willfully – which I can't imagine anything more knowing and willful than knowing you have 55,000 records sitting in your home – if you do that, it is a felony punishable under 18 U.S.C 1001," Coffin said.
Wednesday, 11 Mar 2015 10:13 PM
By Greg Richter
- inShare
Hillary Clinton said in a press conference on Tuesday that, "I fully complied with every rule that I was governed by" when serving as secretary of state.
But a Washington lawyer says that's not true if she signed the OF-109 form required of every State Department official, including the secretary, upon leaving office.
The form states that the signer has "surrendered to responsible officials all unclassified documents and papers relating to the official business of the government acquired while in the employ of the federal government."
Signing and not complying constitutes a false statement and is a felony, punishable by fines and/or prison time, said Shannen Coffin, a former assistant deputy U.S. attorney general, on Fox News Channel's "The Kelly File."
Clinton did not surrender her emails until two years after she left office.
"She didn't comply with the Federal Records Act," Coffin said. "And she clearly did not comply with her own records management handbook for the Department of State, which sets out a very specific process about how you remove records from the department's control."
Those rules require an exiting employee to "prepare an inventory of personal papers and nonrecord materials that you are proposing for removal" and then "request a review of those materials that you've proposed for removal."
A records official then sorts through through all records, including emails, at the time of departure to determine what is public and what is private, Coffin said.
The form itself warns that making a false statement is prosecutable, he said.
"Making a false statement in this context knowingly and willfully – which I can't imagine anything more knowing and willful than knowing you have 55,000 records sitting in your home – if you do that, it is a felony punishable under 18 U.S.C 1001," Coffin said.
[h=1]Hillary Clinton could face jail time as email scandal sparks legal challenges[/h]
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Wednesday, March 11, 2015
The Obama administration will soon find itself in court having to explain to federal judges why it never told anyone former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton used a secret email address, potentially spoiling dozens of open records requests, experts said Wednesday.
And Mrs. Clinton could face up to three years in prison per message if she is found to have broken her word and handled classified information on the secret account, one open records expert told The Washington Times.
The legal challenges have already begun, with The Associated Press filing a federal lawsuit saying the State Department has foiled five years’ worth of requests for Mrs. Clinton’s emails, but never told them or the court that she kept her own server — meaning that her emails weren’t being searched.
SEE ALSO: White House to Hillary Clinton: You’re on your own in email scandal
Meanwhile, the White House tried to keep Mrs. Clinton at arm’s length, insisting she alone can answer questions about what she did, and saying that none of Mr. Obama’s aides were involved in helping her decide which emails to turn over to the State Department and which to delete.
Mrs. Clinton’s office remained silent a day after the former first lady and potential 2016 presidential candidate held a press conference admitting she kept a private email server out of “convenience,” belatedly went through and found public records among her emails and then deleted nearly 32,000 emails she and her lawyers deemed private.
The moves have raised a number of questions about her potential legal jeopardy amid arcane and somewhat outdated open records rules.
“Officials are not allowed to do this, but if they do, they’ll get away with it,” said Christopher Horner, a researcher who has regularly battled the Obama administration over open records laws. “It is a matter of agency self-enforcement. If the agency head is doing this, good luck with self-enforcement.”
Mr. Horner, the man who exposed former EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s use of fake email alias “Richard Windsor,” said Mrs. Clinton’s chief legal problem could come if someone can prove she handled classified material on her private account. But since she controlled all access to her emails by running her own private server, it will be difficult to prove — unless another party in the email exchanges comes forward.
“So long as she retains possession, sole custody, of her server, which obviously was the point of the server, she has greatly reduced her exposure to legal jeopardy unless or until anyone at the other end of correspondence comes out,” Mr. Horner said.
He said it was “implausible” Mrs. Clinton didn’t handle classified information on her account, but in her press conference Tuesday, she said that was the case.
“I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material,” she said.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, which for years has battled for access to State Department records, said they are already preparing to ask several federal courts to review whether the Obama administration was skirting the law by not including Mrs. Clinton’s email server in its searches for documents.
“We had hundreds of requests. The State Department knew from the beginning these records weren’t being searched, and no one told us about it, no one told the courts about it,” Mr. Fitton said.
Mrs. Clinton said she created and exclusively used a personal email account out of “convenience,” saying she didn’t want to carry two devices around with her. She said she believed by trying to mail her fellow government workers at their official addresses, most of her government business communications were being captured, so that took care of her open records requirements.
When the State Department last year, prodded by Republicans investigating the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack on her watch, asked her for her emails, she said she found 62,320 messages that had been sent from her private account during her time in office. She deemed 30,490 of those to be public and turned them over, and deleted the 31,830 she and her lawyers deemed private.
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Wednesday, March 11, 2015
The Obama administration will soon find itself in court having to explain to federal judges why it never told anyone former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton used a secret email address, potentially spoiling dozens of open records requests, experts said Wednesday.
And Mrs. Clinton could face up to three years in prison per message if she is found to have broken her word and handled classified information on the secret account, one open records expert told The Washington Times.
The legal challenges have already begun, with The Associated Press filing a federal lawsuit saying the State Department has foiled five years’ worth of requests for Mrs. Clinton’s emails, but never told them or the court that she kept her own server — meaning that her emails weren’t being searched.
SEE ALSO: White House to Hillary Clinton: You’re on your own in email scandal
Meanwhile, the White House tried to keep Mrs. Clinton at arm’s length, insisting she alone can answer questions about what she did, and saying that none of Mr. Obama’s aides were involved in helping her decide which emails to turn over to the State Department and which to delete.
Mrs. Clinton’s office remained silent a day after the former first lady and potential 2016 presidential candidate held a press conference admitting she kept a private email server out of “convenience,” belatedly went through and found public records among her emails and then deleted nearly 32,000 emails she and her lawyers deemed private.
The moves have raised a number of questions about her potential legal jeopardy amid arcane and somewhat outdated open records rules.
“Officials are not allowed to do this, but if they do, they’ll get away with it,” said Christopher Horner, a researcher who has regularly battled the Obama administration over open records laws. “It is a matter of agency self-enforcement. If the agency head is doing this, good luck with self-enforcement.”
Mr. Horner, the man who exposed former EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s use of fake email alias “Richard Windsor,” said Mrs. Clinton’s chief legal problem could come if someone can prove she handled classified material on her private account. But since she controlled all access to her emails by running her own private server, it will be difficult to prove — unless another party in the email exchanges comes forward.
“So long as she retains possession, sole custody, of her server, which obviously was the point of the server, she has greatly reduced her exposure to legal jeopardy unless or until anyone at the other end of correspondence comes out,” Mr. Horner said.
He said it was “implausible” Mrs. Clinton didn’t handle classified information on her account, but in her press conference Tuesday, she said that was the case.
“I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material,” she said.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, which for years has battled for access to State Department records, said they are already preparing to ask several federal courts to review whether the Obama administration was skirting the law by not including Mrs. Clinton’s email server in its searches for documents.
“We had hundreds of requests. The State Department knew from the beginning these records weren’t being searched, and no one told us about it, no one told the courts about it,” Mr. Fitton said.
Mrs. Clinton said she created and exclusively used a personal email account out of “convenience,” saying she didn’t want to carry two devices around with her. She said she believed by trying to mail her fellow government workers at their official addresses, most of her government business communications were being captured, so that took care of her open records requirements.
When the State Department last year, prodded by Republicans investigating the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack on her watch, asked her for her emails, she said she found 62,320 messages that had been sent from her private account during her time in office. She deemed 30,490 of those to be public and turned them over, and deleted the 31,830 she and her lawyers deemed private.
No offense, but that's incredibly difficult to believe based on your posts at this forum. Your opinions/beliefs seem to be largely of the liberal persuasion. For the record I don't mean that as an insult (No, liberalism isn't a mental disorder or anything close to it). It is just very unlikely that the Republicans nominate someone that runs on a liberal platform which would seem to make it incredibly unlikely that you vote Republican.
[ This nasty lying corrupt bitch-whore has accomplished nothing, but the mindless puppets on the left are lining up to vote for her ]
[h=1]A Simple Question, What has Hillary Clinton Accomplished…?[/h] Posted on March 23, 2015
By Thomas Sowell
A Simple Question, What has Hillary Clinton Accomplished…?
Thomas Sowell California --(Ammoland.com)- It is amazing how a simple question can cause a complex lie to collapse like a house of cards.
The simple question was asked by Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel, and it was addressed to two Democrats. He asked what has Hillary Clinton ever accomplished.
The two Democrats immediately sidestepped the question and started reciting their talking points in favor of Hillary. But O’Reilly kept coming back to the fact that nothing they were talking about was an accomplishment.
For someone who has spent her entire adult life in politics, including being a Senator and then a Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has nothing to show for all those years — no significant legislation of hers that she got passed in the Senate, and only an unbroken series of international setbacks for the United States during her time as Secretary of State.
Before Barack Obama entered the White House and appointed Mrs. Clinton Secretary of State, Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq had notified their higher ups, stationed in Pakistan, that their cause was lost in Iraq and that there was no point sending more men there.
Hosni Mubarak was in charge in Egypt. He posed no threat to American or Western interests in the Middle East or to Christians within Egypt or to Israel. But the Obama administration threw its weight behind the Muslim Brotherhood, which took over and began terrorizing Christians in Egypt and promoting hostility to Israel.
In Libya next door, the Qaddafi regime had already given up its weapons of mass destruction, after they saw what happened to Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But President Obama’s foreign policy, carried out by Secretary of State Clinton, got Qaddafi removed, after which Libya became a terrorist haven where an American ambassador was killed, for the first time in decades.
The rationale for getting rid of Middle East leaders who posed no threat to American interests was that they were undemocratic and their people were restless. But there are no democracies in the Middle East, except for Israel. Moreover, the people were restless in Iran and Syria, and the Obama-Clinton foreign policy did nothing to support those who were trying to overthrow these regimes.
Hillary Clinton became an iconic figure by feeding the media and the left the kind of rhetoric they love. Barack Obama did the same and became president. Neither had any concrete accomplishments besides rhetoric beforehand, and both have had the opposite of accomplishments after taking office.
They have something else in common. They attract the votes of those people who vote for demographic symbolism — “the first black president” to be followed by “the first woman president” — and neither to be criticized, lest you be denounced for racism or sexism.
It is staggering that there are sane adults who can vote for someone to be President of the United States as if they are in school, just voting for “most popular boy” or “most popular girl” — or, worse yet, voting for someone who will give them free stuff.
Whoever holds that office makes decisions involving the life and death of Americans and — especially if Iran gets a nuclear arsenal — the life and death of this nation. It took just two nuclear bombs — neither of them as powerful as those available today — to get a very tough nation like Japan to surrender.
Anyone familiar with World War II battles in the Pacific knows that it was not unusual for 90 percent of the Japanese troops defending Iwo Jima or other islands to fight to the death, even after it was clear that American troops had them beaten.
When people like that surrender after two nuclear bombs, do not imagine that today’s soft Americans — led by the likes of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton — will fight on after New York and Chicago have been reduced to radioactive ashes.
Meanwhile, ISIS and other terrorists are giving us a free demonstration of what surrender would mean. But perhaps we can kick the can down the road, and leave that as a legacy to our children and grandchildren, along with the national debt.
[h=1]A Simple Question, What has Hillary Clinton Accomplished…?[/h] Posted on March 23, 2015
By Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell California --(Ammoland.com)- It is amazing how a simple question can cause a complex lie to collapse like a house of cards.The simple question was asked by Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel, and it was addressed to two Democrats. He asked what has Hillary Clinton ever accomplished.
The two Democrats immediately sidestepped the question and started reciting their talking points in favor of Hillary. But O’Reilly kept coming back to the fact that nothing they were talking about was an accomplishment.
For someone who has spent her entire adult life in politics, including being a Senator and then a Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has nothing to show for all those years — no significant legislation of hers that she got passed in the Senate, and only an unbroken series of international setbacks for the United States during her time as Secretary of State.
Before Barack Obama entered the White House and appointed Mrs. Clinton Secretary of State, Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq had notified their higher ups, stationed in Pakistan, that their cause was lost in Iraq and that there was no point sending more men there.
Hosni Mubarak was in charge in Egypt. He posed no threat to American or Western interests in the Middle East or to Christians within Egypt or to Israel. But the Obama administration threw its weight behind the Muslim Brotherhood, which took over and began terrorizing Christians in Egypt and promoting hostility to Israel.
In Libya next door, the Qaddafi regime had already given up its weapons of mass destruction, after they saw what happened to Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But President Obama’s foreign policy, carried out by Secretary of State Clinton, got Qaddafi removed, after which Libya became a terrorist haven where an American ambassador was killed, for the first time in decades.
The rationale for getting rid of Middle East leaders who posed no threat to American interests was that they were undemocratic and their people were restless. But there are no democracies in the Middle East, except for Israel. Moreover, the people were restless in Iran and Syria, and the Obama-Clinton foreign policy did nothing to support those who were trying to overthrow these regimes.
[h=2]It would be only fair to balance this picture with foreign policy triumphs of the Obama-Clinton team. But there are none.[/h]
Not in the Middle East, not in Europe, where the Russians have invaded the Crimea, and not in Asia, where both China and North Korea are building up threatening military forces, while the Obama administration has been cutting back on American military forces.Hillary Clinton became an iconic figure by feeding the media and the left the kind of rhetoric they love. Barack Obama did the same and became president. Neither had any concrete accomplishments besides rhetoric beforehand, and both have had the opposite of accomplishments after taking office.
They have something else in common. They attract the votes of those people who vote for demographic symbolism — “the first black president” to be followed by “the first woman president” — and neither to be criticized, lest you be denounced for racism or sexism.
It is staggering that there are sane adults who can vote for someone to be President of the United States as if they are in school, just voting for “most popular boy” or “most popular girl” — or, worse yet, voting for someone who will give them free stuff.
Whoever holds that office makes decisions involving the life and death of Americans and — especially if Iran gets a nuclear arsenal — the life and death of this nation. It took just two nuclear bombs — neither of them as powerful as those available today — to get a very tough nation like Japan to surrender.
Anyone familiar with World War II battles in the Pacific knows that it was not unusual for 90 percent of the Japanese troops defending Iwo Jima or other islands to fight to the death, even after it was clear that American troops had them beaten.
When people like that surrender after two nuclear bombs, do not imagine that today’s soft Americans — led by the likes of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton — will fight on after New York and Chicago have been reduced to radioactive ashes.
Meanwhile, ISIS and other terrorists are giving us a free demonstration of what surrender would mean. But perhaps we can kick the can down the road, and leave that as a legacy to our children and grandchildren, along with the national debt.
college grad
law school grad
congressional legal counsel
national law journal listed her one of a hundred most influential lawyers in America twice
first lady arkansas
first lady United states
elected senator
sec of state
yeah what a loser. If you daughter did all that would you complain to the neighbors what a loser she is?
you idiots are fucking retarded. Gw bush was born to a father who became president and that was enough for you dolts. Seriously how do you find your way home?
My list is better than your list
10 Reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton.
1. She lived in the White House for 8 years. She knows her way around the place.
2. She lost a Presidential bid to a clown. She deserves a 2nd chance.
3. She has a Law degree from Yale.
4. She didn’t kill Monica Lewinsky for polishing her husbands knob. That shows compassion.
5. She managed to survive investigations, such as Whitewater,Travelgate, Filegate, and Benghazi.
6. She knows a lot about cattle.
7. Her last name is Clinton.
8. She will be a 69 year old granny by the time she takes office. That shows maturity.
9. She is married to a certifiable horn dog.
10. Did I mention, her last name is Clinton.
