Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
DownGoesFrazier

Hillary Clinton - take 4

Recommended Posts

So, it's started.  The Republicans are going to subject Director Comey to an interrogation in both the House and Senate.  Hopefully, McConnell and Ryan will limit it to one committee per chamber and that will be it.

Of course, they will drag it out until late October to make sure their "findings" have most detrimental effect possible on election.

While Clinton is not blameless, there are millions of people and thousands of corporate and government exectutives (including military and intelligence) who assume their IT people know whereof they speak when say: the system is secure.  How many government and corporate systems have been hacked - and how many have we never heard about?

Do wew really know that the DOS system would have been any more secure?  Part of problem is that everyone uses too many devices with too easy access to various systems.

Bottom line is that she should not have done it, but there is no "criminal" act.

I still haven't gotten the answer regarding what her motivation was for doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, it's started.  The Republicans are going to subject Director Comey to an interrogation in both the House and Senate.  Hopefully, McConnell and Ryan will limit it to one committee per chamber and that will be it.

Of course, they will drag it out until late October to make sure their "findings" have most detrimental effect possible on election.

While Clinton is not blameless, there are millions of people and thousands of corporate and government exectutives (including military and intelligence) who assume their IT people know whereof they speak when say: the system is secure.  How many government and corporate systems have been hacked - and how many have we never heard about?

Do wew really know that the DOS system would have been any more secure?  Part of problem is that everyone uses too many devices with too easy access to various systems.

Bottom line is that she should not have done it, but there is no "criminal" act.

 

The public is sick of the issue. They can hold all the committee hearings they want, it's not going to change anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill O'Reilly shares photos of Barack Obama in traditional Muslim dress he claims are from half-brother Malik's wedding saying they prove his 'deep emotional ties to Islam' 
3606603100000578-3678209-image-m-36_1467

Read & view more Daily Mail >

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3678209/Bill-O-Reilly-reveals-pictures-young-Obama-Islamic-wedding-claims-emotional-attachment-Muslim-world-hurt-USA.html

 

11514-animated_gifchat8etf.gif
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The public is sick of the issue. They can hold all the committee hearings they want, it's not going to change anything.

 

Really?    Would that be the same public that also elected Trump as the GOP Presidential nominee?  :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because HRC is lazy and entitled.    She did what was convenient for her and her staff. 

 

 

I still haven't gotten the answer regarding what her motivation was for doing it.

 

James answered it as well as anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?    Would that be the same public that also elected Trump as the GOP Presidential nominee?  :wacko:

 

Less than half of registered Republicans don't exactly represent the entirety of the American public. At least, I hope not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less than half of registered Republicans don't exactly represent the entirety of the American public. At least, I hope not.

 

That was my point.    As it relates to most political issues there is no such concept as 'the public' or 'the American people'. 

 

These terms are used by partisans as spin to imply a vast majority support their POV when that isn't the case. 

 

Oh, and this election the divisions within each of the major parties are wide.   Therefore even saying 'the Dems' or 'the GOP' support XYZ is likely to be spin.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FBI's Clinton decision proves rules don't apply to rich and powerful

As I sat in my law office watching CNN's coverage of FBI Director James Comey's statement, where he outlined his department's much-awaited decision regarding the Hillary Clinton email scandal and all but concluded that Clinton had broken the law but would not be indicted, his words merely confirmed what I have always known as a former prosecutor and a current criminal defense attorney: Our nation maintains a separate and unequal criminal justice system that is stratified according to wealth and power.

Now, in full disclosure, before you think that this is a Clinton-bashing article, I endorsed Clinton for president last month after it was clear that my preferred candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.), had been defeated in the Democratic primary. As such, my analysis of this issue has less to a with my personal politics and more to do with concerns I share with millions of Americans

Read more The Hill >
 
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/286553-fbis-clinton-decision-proves-rules-dont-apply-to
 
A sad day for the country and once great FBI.
 
3637547599_1ece0db9cd_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intent?

 

I thought it was established precedent that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

Saying "I didn't mean to" would get me absolutely nowhere with the law. But if I was a Clinton, I'd skate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?    Would that be the same public that also elected Trump as the GOP Presidential nominee?  :wacko:

 

They arent the majority of the American public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FBI's Clinton decision proves rules don't apply to rich and powerful

 

As I sat in my law office watching CNN's coverage of FBI Director James Comey's statement, where he outlined his department's much-awaited decision regarding the Hillary Clinton email scandal and all but concluded that Clinton had broken the law but would not be indicted, his words merely confirmed what I have always known as a former prosecutor and a current criminal defense attorney: Our nation maintains a separate and unequal criminal justice system that is stratified according to wealth and power.

 

Now, in full disclosure, before you think that this is a Clinton-bashing article, I endorsed Clinton for president last month after it was clear that my preferred candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.), had been defeated in the Democratic primary. As such, my analysis of this issue has less to a with my personal politics and more to do with concerns I share with millions of Americans

 

Read more The Hill >

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/286553-fbis-clinton-decision-proves-rules-dont-apply-to

 

A sad day for the country and once great FBI.

 

3637547599_1ece0db9cd_o.gif

 

 

When did rules ever apply to the rich and powerful? Like when tRUMP filed for bankruptcy? When is he going to make public his tax filings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They arent the majority of the American public.

 

I wouldn't assume a majority of the American public believes Hillary Clinton didn't commit a crime with regards to the e-mail and that the Obama run Feds didn't assist her in avoiding charges.  

 

I believe polling data shows a majority believe Clinton isn't trustworthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demands to support Hillary Clinton as a lesser evil compared to Trump refuse to acknowledge that such mandates keep existing relations of power intact. Such actions represent more than a hollowing out of politics—they represent a refusal of the affirmative nature of political struggle. They also represent the surrender of any hope of moving beyond the enveloping fog of authoritarianism and a broken political system. Put bluntly, such choices sabotage any real hope for developing a new politics and a radical democracy. These limited choices also undermine the need to develop a broader vision of struggle, a comprehensive politics and the need to engage multiple publics in the quest to rethink the political terrain outside of a neoliberal notion of the future. At issue here is the moral blight that permeates the United States: a politics of the lowest expectations, one saturated in lies, deceptions and acts of bad faith.

 

- Henry Giroux

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intent?

 

I thought it was established precedent that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

 

 

She didn't transmit secrets to people that were not allowed to see them.  That's the distinction a lot of people are forgetting for purely political reasons.  It was her email technology method that has since come under question.  Personally, I don't think she broke any laws at all.  Although they are now going to go after her for lying to Congress based on the fact that some classified documents ended up on her server.  0.01% or 3 out of 30,000.  But she will be able to get out of that too as all she has to say is that she is surprised to learn of this now and that she was telling the truth as she knew it when she testified.

It is all baloney in the end.  Just another way to keep the story alive.  She is paying a heavy price for her mistake as it is.  It has made her a lousy candidate for the democratic party.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She didn't transmit secrets to people that were not allowed to see them.  That's the distinction a lot of people are forgetting for purely political reasons.  It was her email technology method that has since come under question.  Personally, I don't think she broke any laws at all.  

 

But she did very much break security protocols - deliberately and with prejudice.

 

I can't wait to see how effective her administration will be with her and her staff being stripped of their security clearances.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But she did very much break security protocols - deliberately and with prejudice.

 

 

If you believe that then you must believe that the director of the FBI is lying and so are his staff.

She has said she wouldn't do this again in hindsight.  I believe her on that one.  Look at the world of hurt she has brought down upon herself.

This process isn't even about Bengazi any longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't assume a majority of the American public believes Hillary Clinton didn't commit a crime with regards to the e-mail and that the Obama run Feds didn't assist her in avoiding charges.  

 

I believe polling data shows a majority believe Clinton isn't trustworthy.

But not as many as believe Trump is untrustworthy and unqualified.

Regardless, the Republicans have been preparing for this day since the investigation began.  And it was an agency of the Obama adminstration that started the investigation, not Congress.  Although I am sure the GOPers would have started one if DOJ had not.

Any report that did not state that Hillary R. Clinton should be tried for a crime would not have satisfied the Republicans in Congress and nationally.  Not even sure that would have satisfied them.

Based on 26 years in the military and handling classified information as a senior officer, it is not as cut and dried as some think.  There is also a tendency to over classify information.  An old expression we used was that "Even the toliet paper is classifed secret."

Might add that Confidential is used way too much.

The use of electronic devices and systems makes it just that much worse.  Too easy for too many people to forward information and/or parts of documents.  Heck we do it here all the time.

Watched part of the inquisition and obvioulsy the GOPers were well prepared for it.  Their staffs (and other Republicans) must have worked long hours to get this well prepared.  Maybe we could send them to Iraq and Afghanistan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you believe that then you must believe that the director of the FBI is lying and so are his staff.

 

They are being political. They are influenced. If they deny that - and they do - then, yes - I believe they are lying.

 

She has said she wouldn't do this again in hindsight. 

 

Doesn't everybody after they get in trouble for something?

 

You actually think it means she's a better person because she's sorry she got caught?

 

If she had any decency at all, she'd remove herself from contention and endorse the only good choice - Sanders.

 

The only thing that's changed is that there might be a few fewer blinkered Hillary-bots than a week ago. But she hasn't changed one bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Bernie on this one.  "I'm sick of your damn emails."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Bernie on this one.  "I'm sick of your damn emails."

 

The perfect reason to let anyone get away with anything - I'm bored now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But not as many as believe Trump is untrustworthy and unqualified.

 

 

Thanks for providing my favorite Hillary Clinton defense line;    She isn't as bad as Trump.

 

Come on, even a HRC supporter should be able to see that isn't much of a defense.    99% of the people in the country are not as bad as Trump!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The perfect reason to let anyone get away with anything - I'm bored now.

 

I just don't think this is as big a deal as her devoted enemies do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to open up a can of worms, perhaps, and ask what it was exactly that Hillary has done in the past that has made her so "evil"?

 

I get that she comes off as phony a lot. I get from her that she's not much of a people person, and that her interpersonal skills may be lacking, but that doesn't make one evil.

 

I know she was accused of various real estate malfeasance, but was she ever found guilty? If not, do we continue to hold her accountable for those "crimes"? Why?

 

The Benghazi debacle has been proven not to be her fault, and that she did nothing wrong in that horrible situation, despite the repeatedly futile shouts to the contrary.

 

The e-mails "scandal" had no legs either. She was guilty of lazy work practices, the same lazy work practices that were indulged in by many of the previous SecOfStates (a fact that has been mentioned, but seems to be often forgotten), and there was no proof or indication that anything illegal happened.

 

The one thing that I held against Hillary for the longest time was her vote for the Iraq war. However, from a rational, pragmatic point of view, she didn't have much of a real choice at the time. She was a first term senator from New York, a place that had been the most affected by the events of 9/11. Now those events had no connection to Saddam Hussein or Iraq whatsoever, but the average person on the street didn't feel that way. They(voters) were told that Saddam was at least terrorist-friendly, and that he had weapons of mass destruction that would be used to attack Americans here and abroad. Of course the majority of New Yorkers would have approved her vote at the time. And as people have pointed out on the boards previously, the vote that Hillary gave a Yes on was for GWB to have expanded war powers, not a direct declaration of war. So even this egregious error in her past voting record can be understood at least, and largely forgiven.

 

So tell me what I forgot, what crimes she committed, what atrocities she supervised, what despicable horrors she got away with that make her evil incarnate. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...