Hilary Clinton emails - Explain please

[hollyisalovelyname]

I have no idea what the Hilary Clinton emails 'scandal' is all about.
Could wiser Mumsnetters please explain it to me.
Thank you.

Hey winchester

I am on this one, just dont think i will be back in the pub . Its a shame as it seemed like a good idea

I have just been on claigs trump thread, there doesnt seem to be any discussion just lots of agreement

Bernie, MO and Bloomberg are all telling everyone to vote for HC because they are democrats. They are hardly going to tell people to vote for Trump.

Plenty of high profile republicans have publically withdrawn their support for Trump.

Merry I get that you support HC.

It isn't a question of supporting Hilary Clinton. It is a question of stopping Trump becoming president.

In another reality she is facing a better candidate, in this reality she isn't.

Yes that's not a bar it's a club
Just stuck my head round the pub door
There's even more earnestness than yesterday

Got to say I cannot bear Hillary Clinton but listening to d trump today my head was in my hands

I think I'm the sort who would have voted for that Italian comedian or juggler or whatever he was

I want to draw the Earnest Ones out of the pub

Do you think if I shout that there's a fight outside everyone will go and look

Trump is bad but HC is evil. This isn't a woman vs man thing either. If a man had done half of what HC has done they would have been toast a long time ago.
this
People in the UK seem to be completely blinkered and unaware of the extent of the Clintons corruption. In the US people are definitely aware - hence their disgust with Hillary - who deserves to lose.

Give it a go winchester its worth a try

Suggest there is something news worthy happening elsewhere

They will be too buy googling to be earnest

I'm on it

People in the UK seem to be completely blinkered and unaware of the extent of the Clintons corruption. In the US people are definitely aware - hence their disgust with Hillary - who deserves to lose.

No. It's quite possible to see what is wrong with Hillary Clinton.

However, perhaps distance (and the lower profile of the American Apprentice) makes it easier to truly see the alternative.

www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/carl-hiaasen/article112785498.html

So the day before the election the charges of rape of a 13 year old are dropped against Trump. There needs to be an investigation into why Trump was accused of this crime in the first place in the run up to this election and the timing of this case going away is extremely suspect.

Really wow and that's not getting the coverage

Mind you it never got the coverage anyway

The rape story was fake

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3914012/Troubled-woman-history-drug-use-claimed-assaulted-Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-sex-party-age-13-FABRICATED-story.html

People in the UK seem to be completely blinkered and unaware of the extent of the Clintons corruption.In the US people are definitely aware - hence their disgust with Hillary - who deserves to lose.

I think being removed often gives a clearer view. It's easier to deal with facts/check facts and recognise propoganda for what it is without that personal or emotional connection.

I like this piece btw
www.firstpersonpolitics.com/confirmation-bias-how-the-left-resists-it-and-the-right-enlists-it/#.WCFPQ9V9672

Where is this famous (infamous?) pub thread?

.....
Wrt taxes in the US -
People pay federal and state income tax;
Sales tax on every single thing they buy and all services like phone service, plus all items like electricity;
Property taxes, aka local municipal taxes to support their municipal police, fire services, municipal ambulance service, public schools, libraries, park district, meals on wheels, running the municipal government, services provided by the municipal government like street upkeep, animal control, forestry, snow ploughing, pensions for all local /municipal employees including public school teachers and administrators.
(My local high school alone has a $77 million annual budget, 97% of which comes from property taxes in the two municipalities served by the school.)
County taxes pay for services related to clean water and sewage reclamation, county hospitals of all kinds, county morgue, county prison service, county sheriff's police, county courts, county cemeteries, mosquito abatement and probably a gazillion other services, as well as a very corrupt county government/jobs for friends and family of the county commissioners, etc.

Also - you get a bill for your municipal and county taxes a few times every year if you are a property owner/have a mortgage on a property. You can usually pay via your mortgage servicer, in your usual increments. Your property tax bill is a multiplier of the estimated valuation of your property. Property value is assessed every three years. If you do not pay your property taxes the county will slap a lien on your property and the property or the tax lien can eventually be sold at auction by the county for cash or certified funds equal to the value of the delinquent taxes plus interest and fees owed by the taxpayer. If you can't pay back a tax lien buyer then s/he can foreclose. If your county sells your property and not just the lien, that is effectively a foreclosure. Local taxes are assessed purely on assessed value of the property and without any regard to income/ability to pay (though there are some exceptions available).

This is on top of payment for services like recycling and garbage disposal, and water and sewage services paid to the municipality, which are also billed quarterly (in my locality anyway).

Taxes in the US are therefore not just a matter of income tax and sales tax. This is why some taxpayers want to know why the citizens of, for instance, the Baltic republics and (Causacian) Georgia are not paying for their NATO protection.
America will continue to come into conflict with Russia and other countries and there will never be an easy, obvious answer.
Many Americans want to know if this is necessarily the case, or if America goes out looking for trouble. This is because Americans are the ones left carrying the can.

Assad is a dictator who has used chemical weapons against his own people.
And this is anyone's business because?
Yes, the west is now facing the Syrian refugee crisis.
But what is the context of the Syrian refugee crisis?

The answer is America poking its nose into places where its nose does not belong.
Why would the State Department encourage revolt against Assad with well armed and highly motivated Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in very organised armies ready to exploit every weakness in north Africa and the ME? No matter how brutal, Assad was in a position to hold the line against ISIS. Getting involved at arms length in the anti Assad revolt was criminally stupid. The State Department should have taken over the revolt and led it, deposing Assad and setting up a puppet government, or they should have told the revolutionaries they could not support them. Doing it half-assed was guaranteed to fail - anyone with half a brain could foresee it would result in the horror that befell Syria and continues to this day.

When mundane life itself is a 'Rat race' US Presedential elections should be several folds higher in magnitude. Today (Tuesday, 8th Nov, 2016) being the very day for Elections, I would categorically like to state one thing....I am a married woman who is educate but unemployed for several years. I understand Hillary Clinton's ambition to intervene in the subject matters of her husband Pres. Clinton. Well, power is contagious. She must have seen material for a good start, had access to the server and decided to use it to her benefit. Hillary Clinton did NOT ABUSE it, by siding nefarious activities or promoting lawlessness. Hence FBI gives her a Clean chit !!

BUT - it is not correct to base one's judgement on petty issues like emailsserver usage - anti feminist comments-

The National agenda is what is important. How is the presedential candidate going to deal with the current situation in the US. After all every one wants to support the home candidate-every one is against immigration-every party sides its own nationals.

I was in the US when Hillary as the 'Sec of State' in 2010. I got hired and sacked without any genuine reason. Hillary probably did not even know about it. I went to the Madam Tussauds museum and took a Photo with Pres. OBama and Mitchell, could the stop my firing, NO.

The very mindset of the Political machinery should be favourable for its Nationals and lawful immigration. I only wish that the broader picture is considered well and the right Party wins.

Having said all this, My Vote will go for Donald TrumP.

math, the point is that the Syrian problem doesn't end when the fighting stops. The 'line against ISIS' or any other terrorist organisation is not in Syria, it is in the minds of people who support them and they are all over the world. It is a given that fairly or unfairly America will be blamed for abandoning Syrians however the situation plays out.

However, atleast the world can be spared the spectacle of America seeming to abandon not just Syrians, but all Muslims to a man who talks about putting them on a register.

But what is the context of the Syrian refugee crisis?

Assad is quite capable of forcing people to flee all by himself.

The State Department should have taken over the revolt and led it, deposing Assad and setting up a puppet government, or they should have told the revolutionaries they could not support them. Doing it half-assed was guaranteed to fail - anyone with half a brain could foresee it would result in the horror that befell Syria and continues to this day.

That's an incredibly naive statement.
Who said the US were ever in a position to depose Assad or that it would be desirable?
Don't think for a minute that Assad would concentrate on ISIS. He'd have got rid of entire populations, as well as of the innocent in ISIS territories.
There's always an incredible lot behind the scenes that means that we have no idea of the limitations a President has when these crises happen.
Could the US have done better? In hindsight, probably.
Would anyone have done any better? Not sure at all.

Of course terrorism can spring up anywhere. 911 took everyone by surprise.

But in this case ISIS is actually holding real territory, enslaving real people in cities and in the countryside, murdering, raping women and children, and committing extreme acts of barbarism. In North Africa similar acts are committed by various militias.

When you know that a region is in chaos (and it is in chaos, thanks to the west's own misguided and illegal war) and you know that there is a direct threat to the lives and liberty of millions of people (from ISIS), you do not engage in destabilising a regime which, though odious, is both strong and opposed to ISIS.

The fact remains that people in general did not flee Syria by the millions until the US decided to support a civil war to effect regime change by proxy, with the State Department cynically using disaffected Syrian parties to carry out what no US Congress would vote for. How did they think Assad would respond to a threat to his regime? And why did they not understand that ISIS would become a threat in any destabilised state?

Someone either incredibly stupid or incredibly carried away by her own hubris was running the State Department for a few years.

The US is currently bombing Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. The bombing in Afghanistan and Pakistan is accomplished by drones. No war has been authorised by Congress.

Who said the US were ever in a position to depose Assad or that it would be desirable?
The US government says that this is the aim of their involvement in the Syrian conflict.

The huge problem in this is that the US is not prepared to put troops on the ground to accomplish this and never was. It preferred to accomplish its aims by supporting rebels against Assad, which was all right and mighty fine until ISIS showed up with its own war aims.

If you want to sponsor revolutions you should be willing to fight them until you win.

And you should pay close attention to the presence and capabilities of other interested parties to any possible conflict.