Why is Hilary "evil"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I classify people as good people - people who would throw themselves on a grenade - or. Ad people - people who look out for their own self interests.

Hillary appears many times to look out for her interests. From firing the whole whitehouse travel department, to investing in insider deals from cattle futures to real estate to enrich herself, to saying whatever is politically expedient in the moment to Sean Smith's mom, lying to the public in a lawyer like way "these documents were not MARKED classified"......when she clearly knows it's sensitive information, and if she didn't, well then she's not a good person and she's incompetent....the Wall Street speaking fees while claiming she's for increased regulation, her foundation pay to play, enriching her daughter as a board member I her $10,000,000 New York condo, telling her son in law critical Greece negotiations, not that it worked out for him ironically, but hey, it was a hedge fund, not his money......These are not acts of a person with a good heart. For Benghazi was horrible because she used her position and was instrumental in Ghaddafi's demise and instability in the country in the first place which set those people up. That's the travesty - she set them up. American Embassy personnel should probably made the decision to evacuate given additional security wasn't being assigned. I would characterize her as a person with a bad heart who looks out for her own interests ...... one of which would be achieving the presidency.

Wow, so in order for someone to be a good person in your world, someone needs to be willing to THROW THEMSELVES ON A GRENADE.

That's what you said.

Are you a good person? Would you throw yourself on a grenade? No? Why? Possibly looking out for your own self interests?

I don't think your expectations are realistic, nor do I think they would apply to anyone else you've voted for who ran for office.

Being a public servant doesn't mean never looking out for your own interests. That you think so says a lot about how little you understand governance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's not evil. She is elitist and thinks rules and procedures are for the little people, but she is not evil.

+1 but seriously, most rich, especially white people act this way. I don't think Trump is any different in that regard.

[Anonymous]

She has been caught in many serious lies. Lies which show that she values her own interests over our country's laws and the security of our nation and its people. For that I choose not to vote for her.

She has had a significant role in innumerable questionable situations...Benghazi, Whitewater, Bill's sexual exploits, Cattlegate, Travelgate, mishandling of Haiti earthquake relief funds, Russian uranium one deal, Clinton Foundation speech selling, DNC smearing of Bernie, and so forth goes the long list. How culpable is she? Files have been lost, key people have died prematurely. I won't argue with the Hillary supporters about her intent or possible victimhood, but all I will say is that the more I look at her "experience" the more I don't want her to be president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She has been caught in many serious lies. Lies which show that she values her own interests over our country's laws and the security of our nation and its people. For that I choose not to vote for her.

She has had a significant role in innumerable questionable situations...Benghazi, Whitewater, Bill's sexual exploits, Cattlegate, Travelgate, mishandling of Haiti earthquake relief funds, Russian uranium one deal, Clinton Foundation speech selling, DNC smearing of Bernie, and so forth goes the long list. How culpable is she? Files have been lost, key people have died prematurely. I won't argue with the Hillary supporters about her intent or possible victimhood, but all I will say is that the more I look at her "experience" the more I don't want her to be president.

That this has all been proven false and you and your ilk keep talking about it like it's real suggests you're evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been caught in many serious lies. Lies which show that she values her own interests over our country's laws and the security of our nation and its people. For that I choose not to vote for her.

She has had a significant role in innumerable questionable situations...Benghazi, Whitewater, Bill's sexual exploits, Cattlegate, Travelgate, mishandling of Haiti earthquake relief funds, Russian uranium one deal, Clinton Foundation speech selling, DNC smearing of Bernie, and so forth goes the long list. How culpable is she? Files have been lost, key people have died prematurely. I won't argue with the Hillary supporters about her intent or possible victimhood, but all I will say is that the more I look at her "experience" the more I don't want her to be president.

That this has all been proven false and you and your ilk keep talking about it like it's real suggests you're evil.

I've read this so many times. Which evidence are you using to support your claim?

Benghazi
Whitewater
Bill's sexual exploits - Who would be stupid enough to question this? Add convicted pedophile, Jeffrey Epstein, to this segment, who supported the foundation.
Cattlegate
Travelgate
mishandling of Haiti earthquake relief funds - part of Clinton Foundation
Russian uranium one deal - part of Clinton Foundation
Clinton Foundation speech selling
DNC smearing of Bernie


Cattlegate

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/03/30/us/hillary-clinton-turned-1000-into-99540-white-house-says.html?pagewanted=all
Hillary Clinton Turned $1,000 Into $99,540, White House Says, 1994

"At the time the First Lady was trading, it happened to coincide with the biggest bull market in the history of cattle," he said. "When you are lucky enough to catch a dramatic market, you can take $1,000 and scale up and you can make a million. If somebody said they made a million dollars, I wouldn't be surprised at all."

But Bill Biederman, vice president of research at Allendale Inc., a research and brokerage firm in suburban Chicago, said such huge winnings are very unusual in the risky commodities market. "It is possible but it is rare," he said. "This has happened just a few times in my career, where I've made millions on a small amount of money." He said it was also unusual for a customer to abandon the markets after such a profitable run.

Travelgate
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/05/us/memo-places-hillary-clinton-at-core-of-travel-office-case.html?pagewanted=all
Memo Places Hillary Clinton At Core of Travel Office Case, 1996

WASHINGTON, Jan. 4— A memorandum by a former Presidential aide depicts Hillary Rodham Clinton as the central figure in the 1993 travel office dismissals, a politically damaging episode that the aide said had resulted from a climate of fear in which officials did not dare question Mrs. Clinton's wishes.

The newly released draft memorandum, written by David Watkins, the former top administrative aide at the White House, also sharply contradicts the White House's official account of Mrs. Clinton as merely an interested observer in the events that led to the dismissal of the White House travel staff and their replacement with Clinton associates from Arkansas.

In the memorandum, apparently intended for Thomas F. McLarty, who was the White House chief of staff, Mr. Watkins wrote that "we both know that there would be hell to pay" if "we failed to take swift and decisive action in conformity with the First Lady's wishes."

Benghazi
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/feb/09/what-did-hillary-clinton-tell-families-people-who-/
What did Hillary Clinton tell the families of people who lost their lives in Benghazi?, 2016

It is impossible to know with certainty what Clinton told these families in brief conversations at a private reception only three days after Benghazi. Some, but not all, family members who have spoken to the media said Clinton mentioned a video or protests in their meeting. Some said she didn’t mention a video. Clinton says she did not.

[Anonymous]

PP, I understand that YOU think that these things indicate dishonesty and scandal, but I would caution you about believing things that have not been proven.

The three things you are discussing "look" suspicious based on the statements of a) a consultant not actually involved in the specific case, b) a former staffer who was dismissed himself for abusing government resources for personal use and c) an article about a repeatedly investigated issue that specifically states "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW."

Your (repeated?) suggestion that she's responsible for her husband's behavior is disgusting and inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, I understand that YOU think that these things indicate dishonesty and scandal, but I would caution you about believing things that have not been proven.

The three things you are discussing "look" suspicious based on the statements of a) a consultant not actually involved in the specific case, b) a former staffer who was dismissed himself for abusing government resources for personal use and c) an article about a repeatedly investigated issue that specifically states "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW."

Your (repeated?) suggestion that she's responsible for her husband's behavior is disgusting and inappropriate.

There are many of us who are disgusted by Hillary's weakness regarding Bill's salacious behavior. So I'm now disgusting and inappropriate? Bill fucked an intern with a cigar. You can't get more disgusting than that! He has been accused of raping (being inappropriate) with numerous other women. And she looked the other way. As the mother of a daughter, I'd wonder what kind of role model I was overlooking these abusive behaviors.

While she may not responsible for his behavior - although it does take two to tango - she shows she's either weak or willing to sacrifice her integrity in order to climb. Furthermore, she sold her soul dealing with CHILD RAPIST Jeffrey Epstein, who claimed he helped get the foundation off the ground.

I don't stand alone here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I understand that YOU think that these things indicate dishonesty and scandal, but I would caution you about believing things that have not been proven.

The three things you are discussing "look" suspicious based on the statements of a) a consultant not actually involved in the specific case, b) a former staffer who was dismissed himself for abusing government resources for personal use and c) an article about a repeatedly investigated issue that specifically states "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW."

Your (repeated?) suggestion that she's responsible for her husband's behavior is disgusting and inappropriate.

There are many of us who are disgusted by Hillary's weakness regarding Bill's salacious behavior. So I'm now disgusting and inappropriate? Bill fucked an intern with a cigar. You can't get more disgusting than that! He has been accused of raping (being inappropriate) with numerous other women. And she looked the other way. As the mother of a daughter, I'd wonder what kind of role model I was overlooking these abusive behaviors.

While she may not responsible for his behavior - although it does take two to tango - she shows she's either weak or willing to sacrifice her integrity in order to climb. Furthermore, she sold her soul dealing with CHILD RAPIST Jeffrey Epstein, who claimed he helped get the foundation off the ground.

I don't stand alone here.

Do you often tell women whose husbands cheat on them publicly that they're "weak" or "willing to sacrifice their integrity in order to climb"?

Do you hold everyone to these standards? What if your daughter was married to a cheater? Would you say that she was weak and lacked integrity?

Are you voting for Trump? He is the one who is ACTUALLY accused of sexual assault in the company of Epstein.

I still don't see how any of these things are relevant to her ability to govern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because she advocates for abortion.

Advocates for abortion? No, sloppy writer. She advocates for abortion rights, as do all sensible people.

No. She doesn't She advocates FOR ABORTION. You obviously missed all the celebrating and whistles at the Dem Convention when they actually had the audacity to put forth a speaker who "proudly" announced her abortion.

An no, "all sensible people" do not advocate for abortion rights. Way to twist the words around.

You anti-abortion wingnuts never get it. They weren't cheering for the abortion itself. They were cheering for the fact that in 2016 in our society, a woman can make that choice for herself if it benefits her and her family and her health, and she can get it done legally and safely.

Actually it's you pro-death wingnuts who don't get it. These vile people chose to put a woman on stage to literally brag about her abortion. And the crowd goes wild. Yay!!! Yay!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, I understand that YOU think that these things indicate dishonesty and scandal, but I would caution you about believing things that have not been proven.

The three things you are discussing "look" suspicious based on the statements of a) a consultant not actually involved in the specific case, b) a former staffer who was dismissed himself for abusing government resources for personal use and c) an article about a repeatedly investigated issue that specifically states "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW."

Your (repeated?) suggestion that she's responsible for her husband's behavior is disgusting and inappropriate.

Yes, that is my judgment call as a voter. I am not alone in not trusting Hillary. Last poll I saw indicated that 68% of the American public distrusts Hillary.

As an ordinary citizen, I am not privy to all the FBI information and can only see a fraction of what has happened under the Clintons' watch. I can just say that I have yet to come across anything that makes me trust her and plenty of things that make me doubt her truthfulness. Let's just give one documented example: the over-the-top story in which Hillary falsely claimed her helicopter landed under sniper fire in Bosnia. It was a bald-faced lie as there was clear videotaped evidence and witnesses to disprove this. There, that's a totally proven Hillary lie. A completely ridiculous lie she made just make herself look cool. Instead of cool, it made her look like a foolish lying idiot. So yes, I don't believe what Hillary says unless it has been proven. If you have any evidence that Hillary Clinton is a truthful person please do share.

The Washingtonpost had this to say regarding the sniper fire story:
Clinton’s tale of landing at Tuzla airport “under sniper fire” and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/05/23/recalling-hillary-clintons-claim-of-landing-under-sniper-fire-in-bosnia/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I understand that YOU think that these things indicate dishonesty and scandal, but I would caution you about believing things that have not been proven.

The three things you are discussing "look" suspicious based on the statements of a) a consultant not actually involved in the specific case, b) a former staffer who was dismissed himself for abusing government resources for personal use and c) an article about a repeatedly investigated issue that specifically states "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW."

Your (repeated?) suggestion that she's responsible for her husband's behavior is disgusting and inappropriate.

There are many of us who are disgusted by Hillary's weakness regarding Bill's salacious behavior. So I'm now disgusting and inappropriate? Bill fucked an intern with a cigar. You can't get more disgusting than that! He has been accused of raping (being inappropriate) with numerous other women. And she looked the other way. As the mother of a daughter, I'd wonder what kind of role model I was overlooking these abusive behaviors.

While she may not responsible for his behavior - although it does take two to tango - she shows she's either weak or willing to sacrifice her integrity in order to climb. Furthermore, she sold her soul dealing with CHILD RAPIST Jeffrey Epstein, who claimed he helped get the foundation off the ground.

I don't stand alone here.

Do you often tell women whose husbands cheat on them publicly that they're "weak" or "willing to sacrifice their integrity in order to climb"?

Do you hold everyone to these standards? What if your daughter was married to a cheater? Would you say that she was weak and lacked integrity?

Are you voting for Trump? He is the one who is ACTUALLY accused of sexual assault in the company of Epstein.

I still don't see how any of these things are relevant to her ability to govern.

voting third party

I'm not a hypocrite. Both are not my cups of tea.

My daughter would NEVER stay in a marriage if her husband cheated on her. never

I know of a few women who would never leave their cheating spouses b/c the "benefits" are too good. gorgeous home, nice car, private school for the kids - all educated women
I can't respect them, and I put them in a similar category.

Regardless of what you think of women in these circumstances, however, let's discuss Jeffrey Epstein. Based on your response, you'd remain friends with a child molester knowing you received some financial benefits through this arrangement.

Integrity means nothing to so many of you! I'm floored by the support she receives, even though she's been plagued by so many scandals. one after the other - Sure, she was "clean" in some cases, but money talks and the media had a love affair with the Clintons. So what do you expect?

She's a lying, unethical woman who is no supporter of women and children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I understand that YOU think that these things indicate dishonesty and scandal, but I would caution you about believing things that have not been proven.

The three things you are discussing "look" suspicious based on the statements of a) a consultant not actually involved in the specific case, b) a former staffer who was dismissed himself for abusing government resources for personal use and c) an article about a repeatedly investigated issue that specifically states "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW."

Your (repeated?) suggestion that she's responsible for her husband's behavior is disgusting and inappropriate.

Yes, that is my judgment call as a voter. I am not alone in not trusting Hillary. Last poll I saw indicated that 68% of the American public distrusts Hillary.

As an ordinary citizen, I am not privy to all the FBI information and can only see a fraction of what has happened under the Clintons' watch. I can just say that I have yet to come across anything that makes me trust her and plenty of things that make me doubt her truthfulness. Let's just give one documented example: the over-the-top story in which Hillary falsely claimed her helicopter landed under sniper fire in Bosnia. It was a bald-faced lie as there was clear videotaped evidence and witnesses to disprove this. There, that's a totally proven Hillary lie. A completely ridiculous lie she made just make herself look cool. Instead of cool, it made her look like a foolish lying idiot. So yes, I don't believe what Hillary says unless it has been proven. If you have any evidence that Hillary Clinton is a truthful person please do share.

The Washingtonpost had this to say regarding the sniper fire story:
Clinton’s tale of landing at Tuzla airport “under sniper fire” and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/05/23/recalling-hillary-clintons-claim-of-landing-under-sniper-fire-in-bosnia/

Well, there's the politifact analysis that says she's the most honest person in the race. But of course you're cant believe that. Better to believe Breitbart. Gosh, I wonder why she's held to a different standard???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:B-B-B-BENGHAZIIII!!!!! BENGHAZIBENGHAZIBENGHAZIBENGHAZIBENGHAZIBENGHAZI!!!![i]

FIFY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. I don't understand why people are calling Hilary evil. Pol Pot was evil, Hitler was evil, Pinochet was evil. I hardly put Hilary in the same category as those people. Please explain to me why you think Hilary is evil? I'm not a huge fan of her but to call her evil seems extreme.

30 years of unrelenting, escalating smears tend to leave a mark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I classify people as good people - people who would throw themselves on a grenade - or. Ad people - people who look out for their own self interests.

Hillary appears many times to look out for her interests. From firing the whole whitehouse travel department, to investing in insider deals from cattle futures to real estate to enrich herself, to saying whatever is politically expedient in the moment to Sean Smith's mom, lying to the public in a lawyer like way "these documents were not MARKED classified"......when she clearly knows it's sensitive information, and if she didn't, well then she's not a good person and she's incompetent....the Wall Street speaking fees while claiming she's for increased regulation, her foundation pay to play, enriching her daughter as a board member I her $10,000,000 New York condo, telling her son in law critical Greece negotiations, not that it worked out for him ironically, but hey, it was a hedge fund, not his money......These are not acts of a person with a good heart. For Benghazi was horrible because she used her position and was instrumental in Ghaddafi's demise and instability in the country in the first place which set those people up. That's the travesty - she set them up. American Embassy personnel should probably made the decision to evacuate given additional security wasn't being assigned. I would characterize her as a person with a bad heart who looks out for her own interests ...... one of which would be achieving the presidency.

Wow, so in order for someone to be a good person in your world, someone needs to be willing to THROW THEMSELVES ON A GRENADE.

That's what you said.

Are you a good person? Would you throw yourself on a grenade? No? Why? Possibly looking out for your own self interests?

I don't think your expectations are realistic, nor do I think they would apply to anyone else you've voted for who ran for office.

Being a public servant doesn't mean never looking out for your own interests. That you think so says a lot about how little you understand governance.

Throwing yourself on a grenade is a metaphor, symbolizing that you look out for other people and do the right thing, even if it doesn't benefit you. Because you took it literally, I doubt you have very much understanding about nuances of language and therefore believe everything you are told from HRC. She says she didn't lie in the most convoluted obscure way - you believe her.

A better person does not leave with the White House dishes and trappings. That's the kind of person who steals hotel towels, which is the kind of person Hillary is. I don't know how you could say anything on the list from lying about national security, to enriching herself from her political position makes her a good person. Bernie isn't sitting on millions from Wall Street. He isn't employing his kids so that they live in $10,000,000 condos. He isn't giving inside information to relatives in the hedge fund business.

I think it is realistic to have high expectations of someone in office. I'm Shocked that you've moved the bar so low.