Is Obama at equal risk with Hillary over email/server usage?

[Anonymous]

Is Obama at same risk as Hillary over email/server fiasco?

On today's WSJ opinion page former AG says that's why Obama focused on lack of intent and so Comey shut down investigation the first time.

Hmmm.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely. Lynch had her marching orders from Obama to squash the entire matter back in July.

[Anonymous]

I don't think Obama is at risk but the fact that he has been championing her candidacy is just mind-boggling given that she is so damn corrupt.

The irony is that Obama has led an administration that has been relatively scandal free and yet he backs someone who taints everything she touches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think Obama is at risk but the fact that he has been championing her candidacy is just mind-boggling given that she is so damn corrupt.

The irony is that Obama has led an administration that has been relatively scandal free and yet he backs someone who taints everything she touches.

This whole email scandal reflects on Obama’s presidency. It is one huge stain. So, to say that his administration has been relatively scandal free is not true.
This all happened UNDER his presidency.
I cannot understand why he supports her when she has brought so much scandal to his administration. It does reflect on him.

[Anonymous]

The reach is so real!!! Don't hurt yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reach is so real!!! Don't hurt yourself.

Read the article and report back with something on point.

[Anonymous]

Is it too late for him to just back away from her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think Obama is at risk but the fact that he has been championing her candidacy is just mind-boggling given that she is so damn corrupt.

The irony is that Obama has led an administration that has been relatively scandal free and yet he backs someone who taints everything she touches.

This whole email scandal reflects on Obama’s presidency. It is one huge stain. So, to say that his administration has been relatively scandal free is not true.
This all happened UNDER his presidency.
I cannot understand why he supports her when she has brought so much scandal to his administration. It does reflect on him.

Yes, it does also reflect on republicans for hoisting the most incompetent, sexist, racist, narcissistic idiotic bigot as the candidate of the party of Lincoln.

[Anonymous]

Considering his successor will need to bail out and potentially oversee significant re-writes of his signature legislative "achievement", it's say his legacy is f**ked.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-the-affordable-care-acts-arizona-meltdown-1477925051

A look at what happened in Arizona shows the cascading effects of problems with the design and implementation of the ACA, combined with early missteps by insurers. Some priced plans aggressively, angling for market share and betting special programs built into the law would protect them from losses. Those protections didn’t work as expected. Enrollees’ health-care expenses repeatedly overshot the projections of nearly all Arizona’s insurers. The result: a flood of red ink, then withdrawals and premium increases.

[Anonymous]

True. He appointed her SoS. He, or at least his staff, must have known she was sending state emails from a private email account. He must have certainly known at the very least that she was also involved in the Clinton Foundation fundraising and accepting donations from major Middle Eastern donors while SoS.

I don't hold it against him but it does reflect a bad lack of judgement that he wasn't able to go to Hillary and say, look, you're SoS. You do NOT accept donations from foreign powers for your family's foundation while in office. You just don't do that.

That's why the WH probably put pressure on the FBI to close the investigation quickly back in July. Hillary had exposed Obama's weakness in his lack of oversight and he was afraid it would tarnish his legacy if the email scandals were fully revealed and backed up with evidence. Unfortunately it also means he may have worsened the situation because if we ever find actual provable evidence that the WH deliberately meddled with the FBI investigation to get Hillary off the hook, this is the type of corruption that could very badly damage his legacy and even lead to indictments. I hope this doesn't happen. But I wouldn't rule it out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think Obama is at risk but the fact that he has been championing her candidacy is just mind-boggling given that she is so damn corrupt.

The irony is that Obama has led an administration that has been relatively scandal free and yet he backs someone who taints everything she touches.

This whole email scandal reflects on Obama’s presidency. It is one huge stain. So, to say that his administration has been relatively scandal free is not true.
This all happened UNDER his presidency.
I cannot understand why he supports her when she has brought so much scandal to his administration. It does reflect on him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Considering his successor will need to bail out and potentially oversee significant re-writes of his signature legislative "achievement", it's say his legacy is f**ked.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-the-affordable-care-acts-arizona-meltdown-1477925051

A look at what happened in Arizona shows the cascading effects of problems with the design and implementation of the ACA, combined with early missteps by insurers. Some priced plans aggressively, angling for market share and betting special programs built into the law would protect them from losses. Those protections didn’t work as expected. Enrollees’ health-care expenses repeatedly overshot the projections of nearly all Arizona’s insurers. The result: a flood of red ink, then withdrawals and premium increases.

He needed Kennedy support in 2008 to squeak past Hillary for the nomination. He promised them, and later Hillary, health care reform as his number one legislative priority. He was at the time a novice in the ways of our political capitol - coincidently the same as Bill an Hillary when they tried to do this upon their arrival in Washington DC. So he got something through Congress, but without his team appreciating its sel destructing design flaws.

[Anonymous]

I can't get over Obama actually placing his legacy at risk by backing someone as flawed and dishonest as Hillary.

It is just bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't get over Obama actually placing his legacy at risk by backing someone as flawed and dishonest as Hillary.

It is just bizarre.

Yup Obama should back trump instead. Obama didn't endorse anyone in the primary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't get over Obama actually placing his legacy at risk by backing someone as flawed and dishonest as Hillary.

It is just bizarre.

Yup Obama should back trump instead. Obama didn't endorse anyone in the primary.

You do realize there were alternatives to Hillary and Trump?

[Anonymous]

What is interesting is that Obama is not using government email either, using a pseudonym.

Looks like everyone hates FOIA.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/20/politics/obama-personal-emails-podesta-wikileaks-hack/