HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Hillary has been Branded:...

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:32 AM

 

Hillary has been Branded: "...the ongoing FBI investigation..."

It's a line in every article about her. Those with legal experience suspect the Grand Jury has already been convened (one of her IT guys got immunity in March and the hacker just made an "in exchange for testimony" deal), and it's been leaked that others are being targeted, too.

Every time she says "no, the FBI hasn't contacted me" I roll my eyes. It's disingenuous because they are talking to her lawyer, who is also in danger of being in his own world of hurt because she gave him an electronic copy of all of the emails, and at least 22 of them were Super Bad -- hopefully he didn't leave the stick laying around the office.

Plus, why not pick up a phone, and schedule the interview yourself? Why *let* it drag on?

And now that we know that the "second guy who helped with the server" has already racked up hundreds of thousands in legal fees (being paid by the Clintons at the moment), plus her staff, and Blumethal looked like he has already struck a deal to me, the Washington chatter is being reflected on the cable news shows. They have all turned on her simultaneously. Not even a poorly faked anti-gay smear on Bernie was able to deflect this one -- everyone is now bracing to explain to the public why the candidate they've been propping up might be facing criminal charges.

I think Comey is going to make his bones on this case by cleaning up some serious corruption. I'm good with that.

Meanwhile, the ongoing FBI investigation continues....

87 replies, 6950 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 87 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary has been Branded: "...the ongoing FBI investigation..." (Original post)
IdaBriggs May 2016 OP
saltpoint May 2016 #1
bahrbearian May 2016 #3
saltpoint May 2016 #4
grasswire May 2016 #53
saltpoint May 2016 #54
tex-wyo-dem May 2016 #35
libdem4life May 2016 #60
CorporatistNation May 2016 #65
saltpoint May 2016 #67
Demsrule86 May 2016 #2
bahrbearian May 2016 #5
leveymg May 2016 #7
Scuba May 2016 #6
Darb May 2016 #8
IdaBriggs May 2016 #14
riderinthestorm May 2016 #27
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #61
Fawke Em May 2016 #41
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #62
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #9
NWCorona May 2016 #37
LineLineReply .
Fawke Em May 2016 #44
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #45
leveymg May 2016 #10
IdaBriggs May 2016 #15
leveymg May 2016 #30
cherokeeprogressive May 2016 #22
beachbum bob May 2016 #11
IdaBriggs May 2016 #20
leveymg May 2016 #24
IdaBriggs May 2016 #28
leveymg May 2016 #34
hedda_foil May 2016 #75
Post removed May 2016 #68
TwilightZone May 2016 #29
greymattermom May 2016 #12
IdaBriggs May 2016 #21
emulatorloo May 2016 #13
IdaBriggs May 2016 #17
emulatorloo May 2016 #18
hootinholler May 2016 #16
IdaBriggs May 2016 #19
seabeyond May 2016 #23
vintx May 2016 #25
MaeScott May 2016 #26
asuhornets May 2016 #31
IdaBriggs May 2016 #33
asuhornets May 2016 #36
IdaBriggs May 2016 #46
asuhornets May 2016 #47
IdaBriggs May 2016 #48
asuhornets May 2016 #49
libdem4life May 2016 #63
asuhornets May 2016 #71
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #66
asuhornets May 2016 #70
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #73
Jackilope May 2016 #78
asuhornets May 2016 #79
Jackilope May 2016 #80
asuhornets May 2016 #81
Jackilope May 2016 #82
Darb May 2016 #69
Jarqui May 2016 #39
asuhornets May 2016 #42
libdem4life May 2016 #58
Herman4747 May 2016 #50
asuhornets May 2016 #52
Herman4747 May 2016 #56
asuhornets May 2016 #57
ablamj May 2016 #74
saltpoint May 2016 #83
Ferd Berfel May 2016 #32
B Calm May 2016 #38
Ferd Berfel May 2016 #40
B Calm May 2016 #43
Arneoker May 2016 #76
B Calm May 2016 #84
WhiteTara May 2016 #51
nolabels May 2016 #55
jeff47 May 2016 #59
KoKo May 2016 #64
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #72
Autumn Colors May 2016 #77
B Calm May 2016 #85
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #86
Uncle Joe May 2016 #87

Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:37 AM

1. It's so that the FBI has not issued its

Findings but what started out as something of a non-issue is becoming increasingly problematic.

You're supposed to follow the rules and guidelines of your office as a public official. You're not supposed to violate the provisions of those guidelines when they're based on law. And you're not supposed to lie about it.

Not that she gives a good goddam, but if Hillary Clinton asks me, I'll tell her to hold a press conference and tell the truth. The voters can take it from there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saltpoint (Reply #1)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:00 AM

3. But, after all this ,How would we know if she is telling the Truth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bahrbearian (Reply #3)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:03 AM

4. Yep -- which speaks to one of the

pervasive problems wth Hillary Clinton as a candidate, namely that she is held to be untrustworthy by a significant percentage of the electorate.

IMO that's not her only problem. But it's high on the list of difficulties she faces -- even before this email problem. The baggage is getting heavier and heavier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saltpoint (Reply #4)

Sun May 29, 2016, 04:12 PM

53. new national poll Thurs. shows 18% rate HRC "honest and trustworthy"...

...and that is an unprecedented and historic low in America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #53)

Sun May 29, 2016, 04:38 PM

54. Thanks for the update -- I am a day or two

behind most of the news... except the gorilla and the 4-yr old in Cincinnati.

Yes -- it would be way too low for confidence. She needs to sit down with her staff, bring in a couple ool-browed observers from outside, and hold a press conference.

She could even get a dog if she wanted. It worked for Nixon. Sort of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bahrbearian (Reply #3)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:09 AM

35. ^^ THIS! ^^

THIS is my main problem with ever supporting Hillary...and it overrides everything else...I don't trust her, at all.

As they say: Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tex-wyo-dem (Reply #35)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:24 PM

60. That saying is a keeper. Thanks. Applies in a lot of situations.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saltpoint (Reply #1)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:37 PM

65. When The Ship Begins "Taking On H2O" It IS Every Man/Woman For His Or Her Self!

These reporters have a reputation to protect and are NOT going to carry any more water for someone who is much more than obfuscating in her answers to their DIRECT questions on network TV!

MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #65)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:43 PM

67. The wind is shifting, mateys. We could be in for

a rib-rattling gale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:39 AM

2. Link?

Or is this your opinion?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #2)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:04 AM

5. Is this a discussion site, so maybe it's put up for discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #2)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:15 AM

7. It's a brief review of dozens of articles. Check out Paul Thompson's timeline for links

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:14 AM

6. Why do you love Trump?

 

.












sarcasm thingy here for those w/o the gene




.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:17 AM

8. "Super Bad" Ida? Super Bad?

 

You know, in about 10 days you won't be able to peddle this shit any more right? Jussayin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darb (Reply #8)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:53 AM

14. 22 emails are "unfit for public disclosure" so "Super Bad" to have unsecured

 

seems like a reasonable paraphrase, especially when people who know what they are talking about (like President Obama) keep saying "endangering national security". (To be fair, his exact quote was that she didn't do it INTENTIONALLY.)



This article is a little bit out of date, but explains things nicely:
ON EDIT: Forgot Link - sorry! https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/04/how-did-top-secret-emails-end-up-on-hillary-clintons-server/
The various intelligence agencies since have been arguing about what should be disclosed, with at least seven email chains (22 separate emails) — and possibly more — labeled as unfit for any public disclosure. Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), a member of the House Intelligence Committee who says he has reviewed the emails, told Fox News on Feb. 3 that the emails “do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets.” Other sources who have viewed the emails do not describe the emails as strongly, though one official said Clinton’s aides might have put their security clearances at risk.

Hopefully the FBI will finish their investigation soon -- how embarrassing to have to stop supporting a candidate because of violating Federal law when she altered and deleted government records!

18 U.S.C. § 2071(b)
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

The only shit that has been peddled is that this was allowed, and the State Department smacked that down hard this week. Now we wait for the Intelligence Community IG report to come out -- but the preview has already been released:
https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf
The IC IG (Intelligence Community Inspector General) found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.

Of course we now know that over 2,000 classified emails were found on her system, with over a hundred written by her personally and the above mentioned 22 "Super Bad" ones. (And that doesn't include the ones they recovered that she deleted!)

You can count the days until a message board becomes a Hillary-is-Awesome echo chamber, but with these issues, Trump-the-Asshole is a definite danger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #14)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:43 AM

27. I wonder how Skinner will handle the FBI and IC IG report releases

 

If they come out after Hillary " has the votes". Because it will be big news that will affect the campaign. Will the findings be able to even be reported? In LBN or the Sanders group?

Sticking one's head in the sand @ this is a monumental mistake. There's been some Hillary supporters who have begun to understand the unease and why this matters. Will they be forbidden from discussing this?

Trump and the Republicans are going to hammer this. Having accurate facts to counter this will be critical but in the current interpretation of "supporting" Hillary during the campaign, this issue appears to be officially treated as a giant CT because Hillary says so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #27)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:29 PM

61. Stick head in sand, bunker mentality

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darb (Reply #8)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:29 AM

41. We have no problem leaving you in your bubble.

But you'd think you'd like to see it coming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #41)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:31 PM

62. I will enjoy it when they realize oopsie

 

Partisans...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #9)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:16 AM

37. Team Hillary in eight days

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #9)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:31 AM

44. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #44)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:34 AM

45. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:20 AM

10. I think "Unindicted Co-conspirator" works just as well, and has a rich heritage of use>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #10)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:57 AM

15. I was wondering if Guccifer is intended as a witness against Blumenthal...

 

And then they would get Blumenthal to flip on the Clintons?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #15)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:51 AM

30. Along with the likely deathbed deposition of Tyler Drumheller, there is plenty to flip Sid.

As the person who received and forwarded to Hillary the TS-SAP information gathered by Tyler's CIA associates, he can be prosecuted under the felony provisions of Sec. 793 sections (c) and (e), and the associated conspiracy charge, 793(g). For her part in reading this obviously classified info and failing to report its unauthorized possession and transmission, Hillary Clinton may be prosecuted under the felony provision of 793(f)(2).

Note that Hillary may not declassify any information that originates with another agency.

Here are the above-referenced parts of the statute:

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)


(c) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or
(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #10)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:32 AM

22. That's my guess... that in October she's named as an unindicted co-conspirator. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:21 AM

11. lol...like ongoing Benghazi investigation, whitewater investigation, Vince Foster investigation,

 

monica, bill,....and all the other nonsense drivel...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beachbum bob (Reply #11)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:21 AM

20. Out of curiosity, what do you know about Benghazi?

 

Other than the word, and that it is a place in Libya?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #20)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:35 AM

24. Crickets.

Along with catchphrases and one-liners, that's what most of the bots know about her actions as Secretary of State.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #24)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:47 AM

28. As soon as I found out there were rumors of our "hosting" prisoners there

 

prior to them being sent elsewhere for torture, I suddenly was okay with all of the "investigations".

I still don't know if that was going on, but one day I ended up somewhere on the internet where they were saying Benghazi happened because the "bad guys" were rescuing prisoners from being sent for torture. I have no idea if it's true. Part of me doesn't want to know. Part of me believes i already do.

Sigh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #28)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:06 AM

34. There is another aspect to this. The warehouses adjacent to the CIA Annex.

I count 14 large storage units to the upper-right of the CIA Annex. Given that one of the CIA contractors killed was involved in gathering MANPADs (shoulder-fired anti aircraft missiles), and that joint CIA-DOS operation was widely known inside Libya, it is more than likely that was what the attackers were after. We also learned shortly after the attack a Libyan freighter loaded with MANPADs and anti-tank weapons set sail from a nearby port in Libya for Turkey, where these weapons were fought over by various Syrian rebel groups. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/9/28/1137620/-Times-of-London-Shipload-of-Looted-Missiles-From-Libya-Arrives-in-Turkey, citing, http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article3537770.ece

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #34)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:14 PM

75. Thank you, thank you, thank you, leveymg for all the contemporaneous research you did on Benghazi

I don't think I'm alone in having missed these critical backgrounders at the time, so I'm particularly grateful that you redirected us to them now. They really are essential to understanding what the hell was going on and how the state department was involved.

Although it's probably not relevant to the election campaign going on at the same time, I'm curious about the role played by Romney middle east advisor and FOX News contributor, Walid Phares. He's mentioned in one of the pieces you posted at dKos, along with now-former congresswoman Myrick ( R. NC) and Jamie Smith, a former director of Blackwater and then-current head of what sounds like a Blackwater shell company.
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/07/romneys_scary_middle_east_advisor/

The reference to Phares grabbed my attention because on the night of the Benghazi attack, a seemingly well-briefed, and curiously disheveled Romney raced to the nearest camera to accuse Obama (and tangentially Hillary's State Department) of mishandling the attacks there and in Egypt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/12/mitt-romney-obama-libya_n_1877406.html

I'm wondering if there was supposed to have been at least an element of intended October Surprise in the odd happenings around September 11, 2012 ... starting with the "movie" whose only purpose seems to have been to set off anti-American riots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #28)


Response to beachbum bob (Reply #11)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:50 AM

29. Yeah, exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:27 AM

12. ongoing investigation of other things too

Trump University

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greymattermom (Reply #12)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:25 AM

21. Trump University was a financial fraud and a matter for civil litigation.

 

I am not minimizing it, but FBI does criminal investigation, with a special focus on national security and public corruption.

These are not the types of flesh wounds we want our public officials to be experiencing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:39 AM

13. Heads up, Ida: "Video Creator Speaks on 'Social Experiment'

"Not even a poorly faked anti-gay smear on Bernie was able to deflect this one -- everyone is now bracing to explain to the public why the candidate they've been propping up might be facing criminal charges."

Bernie Sanders Did Not Play DMX's 'Where the Hood At'; Video Creator Speaks on 'Social Experiment'

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/7386067/bernie-sanders-dmx-where-the-hood-at-video-fake

Acuna, who added the DMX song to the video, reached out to Billboard to issue his own statement: "Standing in the crowd waiting for Senator Sanders can lead to daydreaming, and it did just that. It started with thinking how funny it would be if I edited a video to make it seem as if Bernie walked out to DMX, but after waiting a bit longer, I decided I'd turn it into a social experiment."

"Everyone seems to be very easily fooled by anything they see on the Internet. On one end we have a majority of the Twitter community going crazy and some going as far as even saying they're 'switching allegiances' and 'I was never going to vote but this just changed my mind' to some people in the LGBT community saying they knew all along that Bernie Sanders is a 'gay basher' and to be honest, if I wanted that to be the message the song would have started completely different. Instead, what we hear is 'Where the hood at?' At the end of it all, I wanted to show the world that politics are not something to fool around with and to prove it, I faked this video," Acuna said.

He continued: "Bernie has always made it a point that the youth needs to get more involved in the political process, and as funny as it may be that DMX’s 'Where the Hood At?' might have swayed them into doing so, it's still very disappointing at the same time. I've observed each candidate very closely, and regardless of what people may think of Bernie Sanders and their stance politically, there's no denying he is a man of the people, and there is more than enough evidence to prove that. With all that being said, I hope everyone realizes that we still live in the real world, not the Internet."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emulatorloo (Reply #13)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:03 AM

17. I saw a statement on Slate. The nice thing about the dirt they've tried to fling

 

is that they've created an automatic sceptiscm about anything "bad" about Bernie that seems nonsensical.

A 74 year old man loving anti-gay rap music?

Pope-Gate was hilarious, Nevada Chair Riot was infuriating (because videos of people sitting and yelling - argh!), but frankly, they really blew it with "he's a racist who faked photos of supporting civil rights".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #17)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:10 AM

18. Yep, anybody w a lick of sense knows Bernie would never play DMX

Mr. Acuna just sounds like a naive guy who took a couple social science courses and got carried away. He seems to think he was doing something good by "proving" Twitter isn't the real world. But in the end turned out to be dumb and misguided.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:58 AM

16. Who *is* paying for the legal defense here?

The Clintons personally? The Campaign? BCCI, er, The Foundation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Reply #16)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:12 AM

19. The Clintons are paying for Justin Cooper's legal bills.

 

He was formerly an aid to Bill, has no security clearance, and was the guy who worked at the Clinton's house.

From the Timeline http://thompsontimeline.com/Latest_Timeline_Entries#/editor/0

March 10, 2015: Clinton falsely claims that her private server had "no security breaches." During her United Nations press conference, Clinton says about her private email server at her Chappaqua, New York, house: "The system we used was set up for President Clinton's office. And it had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches." However, in May 2016, a State Department inspector general's report will detail hacking attempts on Clinton's emails housed in the server. In January 2011, Justin Cooper, who helped managed the server, wrote in an email that he shut down the server because he suspected "someone was trying to hack us..." Later that day, he wrote, "We were attacked again so I shut (the server) down for a few min [minutes]." And in May 2011, Clinton told her aides that someone was "hacking into her email." Additionally, The Associated Press will later comment that "it's unclear what protection her email system might have achieved from having the Secret Service guard the property. Digital security breaches tend to come from computer networks, not over a fence." (The Associated Press, 5/27/2016)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:34 AM

23. Well, you have certainly been a part of that effort.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:39 AM

25. That hair-splitting lawyer speak is going to sink her if she's our nominee

 

Imagine Trump getting her to tapdance around the truth for a while before slamming her with some stupid bullshit thing she could have avoided reflecting on her so badly if SHE'D JUST BEEN HONEST.

I mean, people just loooooove hair-splitting, dishonest lawyers, right? Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:39 AM

26. Drip drop drippity drop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:52 AM

31. Hillary Clinton has not been branded...

She has 3 millions votes more than Sanders...If anyone is being branded it is Sanders...Sanders is someone who is very hard to get along with and now millions of people see it every time he opens his mouth. Yea this email nonsense will drag on unfortunately. But when this primary is over, Clinton will be the winner, and Sanders will go back to Vermont as an Independent. Sanders said once we get to know him we will like and vote for him. That has not happen. I wonder why? Have you ever asked yourself: Why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #31)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:04 AM

33. The funniest part of your post is that you think Hillary and the FBI

 

have ANYTHING to do with Sanders.

The writing is on the wall for her; she's toast. She should have withdrawn when the FBI recovered her deleted emails last October. She could have played kingmaker.

She didn't.

Whatever happens in the Democratic nomination process is a separate issue. I expect Bernie to get it, but he is anti-establishment, so maybe Biden will be put in (but I doubt it).

Americans will not willingly vote for liars who betray America either via incompetence or corruption. Even the fear of Trump ending the world is not going to change that; faced with destroying the Democratic brand as "criminal enablers" for a generation, odds are good she will not be the nominee.

Call me Cassandra, and give my opinion all the weight you think it deserves. I am not a pundit, I don't work in Washington, and I am only a middle class mom with a professional IT background whose current hobby is lowering infant mortality and helping special needs children.

I could be wrong.

But I'm not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #33)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:10 AM

36. You are very wrong...

Your only hope for a Sanders Administration is this so-called indictment of Hillary Clinton. Newsflash: Millions more have already voted for her. What happened to Sanders revolution? His campaign access Hillary's database and he sues the DNC! His reaction to certain situations not favorable to him is: self-righteousness on his part. He's done...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #36)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:45 AM

46. I disagree, and he sued appropriately. His campaign caught the "broken firewall"

 

and proved that both sides could access the other side's data. I work in IT, so I find the explanation credible, and the panicked response from DWS to be pure damage control (which they lost).

But your candidate is being investigated by the FBI, and has already been proven by three Inspector Generals to be lying and spinning and lying some more.

I like Bernie. Hillary is going to be too busy dealing with her legal problems to be campaigning much more.

Hey, did you read where she's probably going to be put under oath in the first two civil lawsuits about FOIA? Only 36 more after that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #46)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:58 AM

47. You have a funny way of dealing with defeat.

Clinton gave Sanders a pass on the database access. If reverse, we would still be hearing about it on DU this very day. You make excuses for Sanders--which does not help him at all. Campaigning will be over June 7th-period. Sanders has insulted AIDS activists, lifelong Democrats, etc. What a political revolution..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #47)

Sun May 29, 2016, 12:03 PM

48. It's not over until it's over. Your perception of defeat is simply

 

a lack of understanding what the true battle is about. It's part of the bubble mentality, and that's okay for now. Sanders will be fighting all the way through the convention; he's an honest guy, so I believe him.

Have a nice day, and thank you for kicking the thread!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #48)

Sun May 29, 2016, 12:13 PM

49. And what will Sanders be fighting for?

A "rigged" system that he lost fair and square. You bought into the notion that Sanders is perfect in every way-he is not. He blames the Democratic Party for his mistakes and DWS. He should have told his supporters which states had open and closed primaries. Sanders wants to get rid of closed primaries because they do not benefit him--you do understand people can see through that. Later

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #49)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:33 PM

63. Just one word about that exchange.....Whooooosh!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #63)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:21 PM

71. LOL..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #36)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:43 PM

66. You know what

 

This is not about Sanders...your party could nominate the man on the moon..I think he is over 35, but I don't think natural born citizen... for all I care, after an entrail reading and the sacrifice of goats and sheep. This is how much I don't care who your fucking party nominates...but this is a historic mistake...not exaggerating when I compare it to Weimar level ok. This email issue is not going away, and your party is risking, seriously toying, with indirectly electing a fascist.

You think this is going away, go ahead, close DU, continue going down into that bunker mentality (actually a marker of a real scandal). But this is not going away. Historians will not be kind. Those of us who tried to warn you, will hold you personally responsible ...for the record, I went from this is nothing to this is damn serious after reading four of those 22 emails. I knew it was damn serious at that moment. None of you has even done that. Those four were born classified, tne moment somebody typed them up. You partisans cannot get that through your damn skulls.

The difference between you and me is that I am not a damn partisan.

So yes, hide yourself from this ongoing scandal. And it has nada to do with Sanders. He could concede and suspend tonight, in the middle of the coliseum, naked (assures a viewing public,) this email issue is not going away. It will continue to roll on. Alphabet soup agencies do not work on your fucking political calendar

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #66)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:20 PM

70. "your fucking party nominates". See that's the problem right there. I am a lifelong Dem...u r not

You made a grand mistake of thinking Sanders (I) was going to change the Dem Party he just joined over night.. Not happening. Just like that indictment won't be happening. You & others can talk about it until u are green in the face. Sanders has shown his tru colors through out this campaign and it ain't pretty. As far as this fucking political calendar you speak of---the date is Jun 4th, yea I moved it up 3 days because-Puerto Rico.

There is no smear campaign that Hillary Clinton can not handle. Where's Jane Sanders by the way--when the media started talking about Burlington College and that loan---she went into hiding.

Face it people over 30 are not buying what Sanders is selling. It just doesn't sound right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #70)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:26 PM

73. Again, this has fucking nada to do with Sanders

 

It could be O'malley. It could be the man on the moon. The agencies are on their calendar. And you guys got lucky. Sanders decided not to touch this. You think Trunp will not touch this? I cannot wait for your hard core bunker mentality hyper partisans to go into the fetal pisition. Trump will not be kind.

It will be damned entertaining. There is a shitstorm coming..and it was herself shooting her foot. This is an own goal, an unforced error. Choose whatever fucking metaphor you want.

Oh and who I pretend to vote for is truly dependent on who counts the votes. That fear I had after 2000, and your party does not care either, has been utterly confirmed. Go ahead, make that historic mistake historians won't be kind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #36)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:48 PM

78. Yes, this whole email fiasco is going away end of primaries.

Nope. You and the DNC have put all your eggs in the HRC basket. The email investigation, her judgement, the huge distrust of HRC have so many holes in the basket, she will lose in the general.

She is so incredibly weak and flawed she cannot clinch the election.

This is not going away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackilope (Reply #78)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:52 PM

79. of course it is not going away..Repugs are good at what they do..but...

It will not change the outcome of the Demo. Prim., and thanks for being a loyal Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #79)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:58 PM

80. Loyal Democrat doesn't mean accepting a DINO Corporate Hawk

Seriously, the accusing someone of being a republican mantra is hollow and meaningless. It doesn't make HRC any more honest or less flawed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackilope (Reply #80)

Mon May 30, 2016, 01:05 PM

81. hillary will be the nominee--period. She may not be as pure as you want her to be,but

she is going to make an excellent president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #81)

Mon May 30, 2016, 01:14 PM

82. Well, corrupt is allowable if the candidate has a D by her name, right?

Just ignore those angry people getting tired of corruption. Calling them "republicans" is far better than demanding or desiring a candidate that won't sell you out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #33)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:07 PM

69. Sorry, you are wrong.

 

This investigation will clear her and it will go away and you will have to eat big flocks of crow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #31)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:22 AM

39. Richard Nixon won by a landslide in 1972. Fourth largest margin of victory in

US history with 18 million more votes than McGovern (roughly closer to 30 million with today's population)

Sometimes the popular vote margin doesn't mean as much as people think - particularly when Hillary's margin ignores the larger populations represented by caucuses.

This was supposed to be a coronation cakewalk for Hillary. Here we are in June and it's looking like she won't be able to put it away until the convention - if she's not indicted.

Sanders started out a year ago about 50-60 pts behind. His trajectory has been upward since the start. He's running neck and neck with her. Have you ever asked yourself why?

And she's allowed Trump to close the gap. Why is that? How come she can't beat Trump handily like Sanders?

But we agree on one thing: this email thing is not going away. Lots more to come on that and not much of it good for her poll numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #39)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:30 AM

42. Your words:

"Hillary's margin ignores the larger populations represented by caucuses." See the Washington state primary..yes, I know it was non-binding. But Hillary's win speaks volume. She also won the Nebraska primary after Sanders won the caucus.

Your words: "coronation cakewalk for Hillary" the only people who have said this was Sanders and his supporters---no one else.

Sanders has done well, but his best was not good enough---he is losing.

The email nonsense does not have to go away--many see it for what it is---nonsense, right-wing smear and Hillary very familiar with that--have you seen her sweat about this? The answer is NO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #42)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:28 PM

58. Two words. Clinton Foundation.

 

They outsmarted themselves while becoming fabulously wealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #31)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:39 PM

50. MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO LIKE BERNIE...

 

...what's more, Independents like Bernie more than they like Hillary, she with the 55% disapproval rating.
And -- get this -- Independents will vote in November.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herman4747 (Reply #50)

Sun May 29, 2016, 02:18 PM

52. And who will the Independents vote for?

Trump or Clinton?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #52)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:15 PM

56. Remains to be seen.

 

Independents tend not to prefer liars, so the key question for them is "Who is the worst liar, Trump or Hillary?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herman4747 (Reply #56)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:22 PM

57. that says it all...eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herman4747 (Reply #56)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:21 PM

74. Or

They may vote 3rd party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #31)

Mon May 30, 2016, 01:29 PM

83. The key word in that one phrase up there is

'ongoing.'

Connect that dot with 'investigation' and then, on to 'by the FBI.'

Now go back to 'ongoing.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:53 AM

32. It's not going away. It will continue through November

unless she's not in the race. Otherwise Drumpf wins.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #32)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:20 AM

38. It's only going to get worse. I blame the DNC for pushing her out in an unfare advantage to

 

the front. Now it appears we are going to have a deeply flawed candidate and very possibly a Pres Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Calm (Reply #38)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:26 AM

40. We don't' control or even influence the DNC

creatures like the Koch Bros do.

What could go wrong?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #40)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:31 AM

43. That's true.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Calm (Reply #38)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:25 PM

76. Yes, why didn't they push for more caucuses and less primaries

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arneoker (Reply #76)

Mon May 30, 2016, 03:17 PM

84. Seeing how tax payers pay for these primary elections, they should all be open.

 

Around 50% of voters no longer feel their party represents them anymore. Many are now registered as independent. Along comes a candidate that inspires them and the door is slammed in their face. Seems to me as tax payers and they are paying for the primary, they should have every damn right in the world to vote, especially if you want them to vote in the GE for your party's candidate! If you were a true democrat, you'd open the doors and grow the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:45 PM

51. Looks like Bernie may get one of his own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 04:46 PM

55. Thanks for the update Ida

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:38 PM

59. Her lawyer did leave the stick laying around the office.

Now, her lawyer does have a clearance and a SECRET-rated safe where he kept the stick. So he's probably not in too much trouble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #59)

Sun May 29, 2016, 08:33 PM

64. He's been with her since Yale Law School and Arkansas...

"Nothing to See There....Just Move Along."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:23 PM

72. No problem. Sir Donald, the gentleman, will not mention it in polite society.

 

Unfortunately, his notion of polite society is better known for cowboy boots, armbands, crushed beer cans, and white sheets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 07:53 PM

85. How bad are her unfavorable ratings today? Her and Trump were tied last numbers I seen.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Calm (Reply #85)

Mon May 30, 2016, 07:54 PM

86. It is memorial day weekend

 



Ask tomorrow, we might see that tomorrow

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:03 PM

87. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, IdaBriggs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread