• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Clinton Staffers Discuss Which Emails to Release, and Delete

I bet more comes out on this. I have noticed the Clinton camp has been very quiet about the specifics of the emails. The election might be over in November but the fight is just starting.
 
I bet more comes out on this. I have noticed the Clinton camp has been very quiet about the specifics of the emails. The election might be over in November but the fight is just starting.

I've noticed that the snippets that have come out have been pretty pathetic. A Clinton staffer receives an email from a third party saying she hates people, oh well it must be true.
 
I've noticed that the snippets that have come out have been pretty pathetic. A Clinton staffer receives an email from a third party saying she hates people, oh well it must be true.

Yeah, like this one:
Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, Rwanda

From:adesai@clintonfoundation.org
To: blindsey@clintonfoundation.org, lgraham@clintonfoundation.org, doug@presidentclinton.com, justin@presidentclinton.com
Date: 2012-04-16 18:56
Subject: Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, Rwanda


Last Thursday, April 12, I met individually with the Ambassadors from Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, and Rwanda, in Washington, DC. Below is a summary of key points from each meeting, and we are following-up on each point. I'd welcome your feedback. Sincerely, Ami

QATAR

- Would like to see WJC "for five minutes" in NYC, to present $1 million check that Qatar promised for WJC's birthday in 2011.

- Qatar would welcome our suggestions for investments in Haiti - particularly on education and health. They have allocated most of their $20 million but are happy to consider projects we suggest. I'm collecting input from CF Haiti team.

BRAZIL

- President Rousseff may come to NYC for UN in September; I pitched CGI, again, and will continue to do so.

- We agreed to try to arrange a WJC-Rousseff meeting whenever she and he are next in the same city.

- With regard to Rio climate conference, Ambassador's team is going to think about any sites that WJC could visit to highlight Brazil's leadership on climate issues. [I made clear WJC visit to Rio is undecided.] They said they'd be happy for WJC to come.

- I committed to send them details on CCI in Brazil.

- Ambassador mentioned Lula receiving an award in Iowa and how much Lula enjoyed Iowa. I suggested Lula come to Little Rock when WJC convenes meeting of former heads of state (Club of Madrid). Also discussed Ambassador going to Little Rock to speak with Clinton School students - he said he'd like to. I'll work with Stephanie on this.\

- We discussed Lula's health - Ambassador said he's recovering and still committed to agriculture work in Africa. We agreed it would be good for WJC and Lula to do something together on agriculture in Africa.

PERU

- Per CGSGI, I asked for Ambassador's ideas on which sectors/parts of Peru to focus on in order to create jobs. He suggested we speak with his son, an alderman in Lima, about jobs projects for young men who otherwise could be recruited by gangs. Ambassador also suggested speaking with Minister for Women and Vulnerable Populations, Ms. Ana Jara, for jobs projects for women.

MALAWI

- Ambassador told story of Mutharika's death (said he collapsed with no prior symptoms during a morning meeting, was taken to hospital, then flown to South Africa but passed away en route); and emphasized significance of smooth transition to successor, within their constitutional framework. Sounds like new President is laying low until the memorial service for Mutharika, and then plans to announce her new government.

- Ambassador again urged that CDI consider dairy/cattle projects; I reminded him we'd be happy to speak with minister of agriculture or whoever Ambassador suggests in the industry; he said he'd let us know.

RWANDA

- Kagame is organizing an event in June to commemorate closing of Gacaca process for the genocide. They asked if WJC could go. I said Africa trip is probably in July and we haven't decided countries yet but if there's anything they'd want WJC to do in Rwanda in July, to let us know. I also said to let us know if they'd want a message from WJC for the June event; they'll let us know.

- Ambassador asked if WJC/CF/CGI could do anything to help on education/universities in Rwanda. I explained we are constrained by funding but if they have specific ideas, to let us know. He said they'll put together some ideas for us.

- Ambassador asked about attracting more investments/businesses to Rwanda, including mining/natural resources investors. I emphasized CGI as an opportunity for Kagame to engage investors. I also mentioned Barclays interest in doing something at CGI on investing in Africa. Also mentioned Kagame doing a side-meeting at/around CGI that convenes investors interested in Rwanda, akin to WJC's investor meeting for Ireland or session WJC did for Haiti last year at CGI.

- Ambassador said criticism of Kagame seems to have quieted, partly due to WJC and Blair's unwavering support for Kagame. Ambassador said Kagame and Rwanda very much appreciate WJC's unflinching support.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/8396
 


I'm sure you see what is going on in the media, and here on DP.

Dozens of threads on Trump drooling and allegedly groping, and almost nothing on the damning email revelations.

Total avoidance, total denial. Let the thread die.

It makes one wonder who, or what, many of the left sided posters are on this site.

We already know what the MSM has become.
 
I'm sure you see what is going on in the media, and here on DP.

Dozens of threads on Trump drooling and allegedly groping, and almost nothing on the damning email revelations.

Total avoidance, total denial. Let the thread die.

It makes one wonder who, or what, many of the left sided posters are on this site.

We already know what the MSM has become.

I agree but it isn't working. Social media is blowing up on them.
 
Last edited:
Is there something nefarious here I'm missing?

exactly!
where are the portions of the emails which should be found damaging to hillary?
 
Last edited:
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6391

Talking points and strategies to get around FOIA and House Oversight subpoena's

I didn't know you had a thread on this when I responded elsewhere, so I'll ask the question here. Please quote the parts of the exchange that indicate anything suspicious. The last exchange is this:

From:cheryl.mills@gmail.com To: robbymook@gmail.com Date: 2015-03-04 21:10 Subject: Re: Subpoena Issuance

right to both

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Robby Mook <robbymook@gmail.com> wrote: >

Just for clarity: this House subpoena is just for Libya, right? > We were discussing releasing everything, no? >

I'm missing the problem here. Please explain.
 

From the article:

"Using broad search terms, we have identified approximately 30 documents potentially responsive to a Benghazi-related request," State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a statement. "At this time, we have not confirmed that the documents are, in fact, responsive, or whether they are duplicates of materials already provided to the Department by former Secretary Clinton in December 2014.
 
What was nefarious about the specific email I responded to?

also,


So there's nothing nefarious about Clintons team being the arbiter of whats public record and whats not ?

Of what information applies to the subpoena and what can be deleted ?? Because the House oversight commitee wanted her server delivered to the IG for independent review but instead they received emails vetted by Hillary and her aides.

You dont see a problem with that ?
 
This shoots down the premise that she always intended to release the emails.

No it doesn't. Read that last exchange. "Yes to both."

Or, if you think it does, quote the relevant part of the exchanges.
 
Back
Top Bottom