Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tal Vez

(660 posts)
44. I disagree. Any nominee will be a target.
Fri May 27, 2016, 03:04 PM
May 2016

Sanders hasn't been vetted for 25 years like Clinton, but I do know that people claim that he honeymooned in the USSR. Don't you think that the Republicans can do something with that? Why did he choose the USSR for his honeymoon? Where exactly did he stay? Can he account for where he went and who he spoke with each day? He still has his receipts, doesn't he? I sure hope he hasn't destroyed any of that evidence! Without the receipts, there will always be questions. And every answer provides seeds for the next 15 questions. Wasn't he in Kenya when Obama was born? It doesn't matter how ridiculous it may sound, this is what happens.

Haven't you been watching what the GOP does with its opponents? He may be as clean as the Virgin Mary, but that won't even slow down the right wingers. You're just being too sensible. These guys aren't sensible or fair or honest. They just want to win and they don't care how.

So, Hillary had a server at her house [View all] TexasMommaWithAHat May 2016 OP
dude, she could have done that on any server. mikeysnot May 2016 #1
In fact, it stands to reason that using a secure server would have made hiding something easier. Garrett78 May 2016 #5
Very true re the corporate bucks. TexasMommaWithAHat May 2016 #6
No you can't..... Bob41213 May 2016 #8
opinion noted.... mikeysnot May 2016 #60
You're wrong. There is no audit trail of State Department emails housed on her private server. Avalux May 2016 #9
No, unsecure servers handling sensitive State Department communications Maedhros May 2016 #11
there is no such thing as a secure server.... mikeysnot May 2016 #16
There are degrees of security. Maedhros May 2016 #19
I work in the industry mikeysnot May 2016 #20
So do I, and nobody suggests throwing up our hands and giving up. Maedhros May 2016 #22
oooh-K mikeysnot May 2016 #24
Yeah, that was a little odd. lagomorph777 May 2016 #54
Don't know why he ignored you so quickly ThirdWayToTheHighway May 2016 #56
It was on the news.... mikeysnot May 2016 #58
So do I. And guess what... vintx May 2016 #33
You assume way too much. mikeysnot May 2016 #51
So what's the reason for downplaying the reckless manner vintx May 2016 #70
Right. Like SIPRnet and JWICS. Fawke Em May 2016 #49
Next! mikeysnot May 2016 #52
That wasn't a hack. Fawke Em May 2016 #67
Sooo you are saying it wasn't compromised??????!!!!!!! mikeysnot May 2016 #69
Yeah, no. yodermon May 2016 #29
Breathtaking hubris. vintx May 2016 #34
No she couldn't have done that on any server. You seriously don't know what you are talking pdsimdars May 2016 #57
Opinion noted.... mikeysnot May 2016 #59
Who among the candidates wants all of their communications to be public? Tal Vez May 2016 #2
too late for that. Hiraeth May 2016 #3
It's the law. Keep your personal stuff on your personal email. TexasMommaWithAHat May 2016 #4
None of the other candidates left office with huge numbers of documents that the rules required mikehiggins May 2016 #7
I hear you. Maybe I'm just having trouble imagining Tal Vez May 2016 #12
Kissinger is now Hillary Clinton's buddy. Peace Patriot May 2016 #42
What part of "it's the LAW" don't you understand? IdaBriggs May 2016 #10
Everyone should follow the law. Tal Vez May 2016 #13
Oddly, tens of thousands of people obey these laws everyday without IdaBriggs May 2016 #18
I am confident that each and every person who has worked for the government longer than a week Tal Vez May 2016 #23
The people who are upset are the ones who know what they are talking IdaBriggs May 2016 #25
I appreciate your spending so much time on that response, Tal Vez May 2016 #28
Let's put it this way. Suppose you're interviewing candidates vintx May 2016 #35
you know, to some extent, I can agree with you and if she weren't running for President Hiraeth May 2016 #26
I can answer that question. Tal Vez May 2016 #31
because he is not NOW under investigation and may NEVER be while she is ALREADY CURRENTLY Hiraeth May 2016 #37
Am I with you? Tal Vez May 2016 #46
Pretty sure the term is DEMOCRATIC Socialist Hiraeth May 2016 #53
It's the term "socialist" that stings. Tal Vez May 2016 #55
I disagree but no lengthy reply from my phone. Hiraeth May 2016 #64
Your disagreement is noted. Tal Vez May 2016 #65
The OIG is not the GOP. The FBI is not the GOP. Peace Patriot May 2016 #43
I disagree. Any nominee will be a target. Tal Vez May 2016 #44
Your argument does not hold water... ljm2002 May 2016 #47
If the Republicans control either the Senate or the House, Tal Vez May 2016 #50
What you say may be true... ljm2002 May 2016 #61
I don't think that any of this is very complicated. Tal Vez May 2016 #62
All of which is fine and dandy... ljm2002 May 2016 #66
I see. You want a more limited answer. Tal Vez May 2016 #68
Or easier still, keep your private emails on a seperate account floppyboo May 2016 #39
This national security scandal is not going away, she needs to drop out now so the B Calm May 2016 #14
SPOT ON. Bob41213 May 2016 #17
Remember, this was back when Sarah Palin and other politicians used private emails to skirt FOIA. TheBlackAdder May 2016 #15
I find it very telling. nt vintx May 2016 #36
VOLUMES. Hiraeth May 2016 #38
Principles? Naaah... Integrity? Hell no... vintx May 2016 #41
I'm compelled to conclude you know very little of servers and networks. LanternWaste May 2016 #21
Hubris. Rules only appy to the little people. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #27
If she were a Republican, this would be termed a "rogue operation" RufusTFirefly May 2016 #30
What would happen if the fiberoptic network went down? JonathanRackham May 2016 #32
re: "why did she have a private server installed" thesquanderer May 2016 #40
She installed it too. Pulled the cables, Darb May 2016 #45
LOL, I highly doubt that democrattotheend May 2016 #72
I'll shut off my VPN now Dem2 May 2016 #48
Either that or "protecting national security is so inconvenient" lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #63
I agree, although I doubt she actually had anything to hide democrattotheend May 2016 #71
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»So, Hillary had a server ...»Reply #44