"
Promising to give the trove of the former Secretary of State’s emails to the highest bidder, the specialist is showing subject lines as proof of what appear to be legitimate messages."
“Hillary or someone from her camp erased the outbox containing her emails, but forgot to erase the emails that were in her sent box,” an insider reveals to Radar of the Presidential contender’s latest nightmare.
Radar has learned that some of the topics discussed in the email appear to include everything from Benghazi to the Algerian hostage crisis — with subject lines such as:
“H Libya security latest. Sid” (with attachment)
“H FYI, best analysis so far of hearing Sid,’ about the latest security
in Libya”
“H Algeria latest French Intel on Algeria hostage Sid”
“H Latest French Intel in Algeria hostage Sid” (with attachment)
“H Latest Libya intel internal govt discussions high level” (with
attachment)
“H HIGHLY IMPORTANT! Comprehensive Intel Report on (with attachment)”
Via Drudge
16 comments:
My first reaction is that at some point, the Clinton camp is going to have to take out Drudge. He's a mortal enemy. Short of physical harm, I've long thought that an elaborate hoax might help destroy his credibility. But I think Drudge is too wily and won't fall for it when it does happen.
Half a million is a bargain if it's legit.
The Slush Fund can pay for that. That's why people like Stephanopolis give so generously. 500K - drop in the bucket.
Chump change for Trump.
He should ask for at least one meeelion dollars. $500,000 isn't exactly a lot of money these days.
If the RNC doesn't pony up for this it shows how deserved the title Party of Stupid is for them.
If he's offered $750,000 will he throw in the Brooklyn Bridge?
Sounds too good to be true. Sorry, and I hope that I'm wrong.
New e-mails show Hillary assisting for-profit college that paid Bill Clinton $16 million
FOR BALLS.
What Allen S said...and I, too, hope I am wrong. It would be just too much fun to have it be true. One can only hope...
If a Clinton's lips are moving it is very likely a lie. Bill was much better at it (what the meaning of "is" is...etc.)...a master really...Hillary is a smarmy condescending putz. That she might be the next POTUS is terrifying. I'm not enthralled with Trump, don't trust him further than I can throw a grand piano left handed, but if it's Trump vs Hillary...I'm voting for Trump...at least I can be surprised or disappointed without knowing so up front in detail. Trump is like Obama...vast plans based upon half-vast ideas. Never works out well. But Hillary is a known piece of work, plans that are less than half-vast, and all stupid, so if she wins it is our fault for not knowing the obvious. Lord help us if we're that foolish. I can barely wait for a totally closeted White House server run by sundry geniuses without clearances. If the Democrats are half smart they'll dump Hillary and find a better candidate...that is under 70 (I am 72+) who can be at least semi-forthright. Give me a youthful candidate that isn't a sycophant....the Republicans have some 17 potentials, some fresh and young, while the Dems, at present, have three old white folks. It's a mess.
Kochs are writing the check right now.
Allen's right, too good to be true. But probably causing a lot of rectal clinching in the Clinton camp, which is good. If you don't think about it too hard.
Gone now from Drudge. Delicious fantasy while it lasted.
If he gave the emails to the Times and the Guardian do you think the editors would vet and publish them in the way they did the Assange dump?
Rabel ... I kind of like "rectal clinching" (as you said, if not thought of graphically) because it makes Hillary's eyes bug out. Beyond that it just might force the Democrats look deeper in to their ranks to find a younger candidate, black or white or any other hue, who does not have Hillary's baggage and who very likely has far better ideas. I quit as a registered Democrat when the party promoted putzes and refused to promote candidates who weren't DC habituates for decades. I am now a Republican leaning Independent who votes for candidates from both parties. The Republicans could also do with some putting out to pasture several life long DC habituates. Nothing wrong with the old folks still running for office, but yee gawd, why promotion by the parties for POTUS?
I am an old dude myself (nearly 73 now) so I feel very free to say, enough with other old dudes and dudettes...the youth and new ideas are our future and both parties need to figure that out and not just put forth candidates who've been in harness forever.
A "fact" I cannot prove, but I'm rather certain that a copy of Hillary's entire server records exists in somebody's hands, and hands she controls. Worked with Databases for too long in DOD & DA to think otherwise. I didn't work with two computers (one mine the other DOD's) when on the road (I traveled a lot) or working from home to not understand the reasons for it. Next, once a copy is made, clandestinely, worse if provided to someone with out the clearance, role, and permissions appropriate, the gates are open. That "copy" matter is already a proven matter...e.g., thumb drive to a lawyer. The paper printing out of 116 reams of "copies" was a punk maneuver designed to slow down and cloud discovery. Is that the kind of person we want with the "Nuclear Football?"
Post a Comment