CNN’s Borger: Clinton Knew Her Server Was Wrong, Tried to Conceal It – IOTW Report

CNN’s Borger: Clinton Knew Her Server Was Wrong, Tried to Conceal It

‘Clinton Plays By a Different Set of Rules’

Breitbart: On Wednesday’s broadcast of CNN’s “AC360,” CNN Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger said that emails released by WikiLeaks back up the argument that Democratic presidential nominee former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew her email setup was wrong and tried to conceal it, and that pointing this out is “like saying, oh, there’s gambling gong on here in Casablanca. Sure, of course Hillary Clinton plays by a different set of rules.”

Host Anderson Cooper stated of the emails “It does seem reinforce the narrative the Republicans have been re-iterating for months, that Hillary Clinton knew her email server was wrong, and when she got caught, her aides, — when she got caught, she tried to conceal it. Her aides wanted to conceal it.”

Video

11 Comments on CNN’s Borger: Clinton Knew Her Server Was Wrong, Tried to Conceal It

  1. Left-leaning American voters better wake the f**k up. Electing this criminal Crooked HilLIARy sets the left up for a slaughter over the next four years as the administration suffers scandal after scandal (if RINO idiots can ever build an indictment). It could spell the end of the American leftist movement overall and the crippling of the Democrap party for decades.

    Go ahead. Make my day.

  2. Oh darn. The liberal press has a new phrase, “BAKED IN”, to ‘explain why all the email dirt ‘hasn’t moved the needle’ on Hillary.

    They get their damn scripts directly from the HRC campaign and aren’t even permitted to modify it enough to make it less obvious that THEY ARE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR, FLYING MONKEYS OF THE EVIL WITCH, HRC.

  3. When the patient pays for your snake oil, publicly demonstrates taking according to official directions, and dies – your choices are placebo or poison. You can’t generate future sales on ingredients, nor efficacy. You still have hype, and inertia.

    When the only explanations for your already locked in choice for chief executive – grand deciderer – are mentally challenged, beyond the normal end of stupid (we dare not use the “r” word), or proudly evil, you can’t generate future sales with any form of the truth. Of course, you still have hype, and inertia.

  4. Roughly 47% of Americans see nothing wrong with Treason, Corruption, Lying, Conniving, Theft, and Murder – provided that those crimes are in their (perceived) interests.

    That a politician (of ANY party) is perfectly willing to lie, dissimulate, “spin,” or whatever she wishes to call the practice, simply to fool enough people to get elected to office, should indicate, to any reasonable citizen, that our Republic is on life support.

    A Republic, by definition, is the sovereign (us) electing men and women whose ideas and philosophies most accord with our own. When a pol uses deceit to obtain a seat, that pol has committed Treason against the very notion and foundation of our Republic.

    That we (generally speaking) are so ignorant of this fact is distressing.

    That we tolerate it is disgusting.

    izlamo delenda est …

  5. Bbbut.. Reich wing conspiracy!

    Damn leftist fools. You’re being used by your own leaders, putting corruption before country, helping the oligarchs and established politicians control your minds because you’re woefully misinformed, ignorant, stubborn assholes.

    You can change that. Will you? It’s now or never.

  6. @Tim October 28, 2016 at 11:29 am

    Two points:

    > simply to fool enough people

    They’re not being fooled. They’re as mentally capable – up and down – as those they disagree with. You may not understand why Maury invites them back a fourth time, after three “It has to be him, there was absolutely nobody else!” for a “Who dat baby daddy?” show, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t – nor, even, don’t – understand the absurdity of what they say.

    > electing men and women whose ideas and philosophies most accord with our own

    That’s not a republic. That’s a representative democracy.

    (And, before Dadof4 accuses me of pedantry, the difference is quantum when the question is “What happens when half, plus a single vote, of the ELECTED say ‘this’ rather than ‘that’?”.)

    Mix the two together:

    What happens when roughly half of the electorate think “It’s okay to wake up with another dude, that you met at a tranny bar, and call yourself a ‘heterosexual feminist’ – again – as long as you say it was an accident.” ELECT a very, very small group that YOU agree to obey, unconditionally, as long as the granularity of the vote of the ELECTED is half the quorum, plus one?

    (To “accident” Franklin – That is madam is your republic. If you care to keep it.)

Comments are closed.