2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumObama's Endorsement Undercuts Clinton FBI investigation.
Yesterday Josh Ernest admitted the FBI is conducting a "criminal investigation" regarding Clinton's emails. You can find it on C-Span.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/fox-news-obama-hillary-clinton-fbi-224143
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/fox-news-obama-hillary-clinton-fbi-224143
SMH
floriduck
(2,262 posts)article one little iota.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Could have happened to anyone.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Earnest also told Rosen that the president when discussing this issue in each stage has reiterated his commitment to this principle, that any criminal investigation should be conducted independent of any sort of political interference.
GaYellowDawg
(4,753 posts)Lucinda
(31,170 posts)Samantha
(9,314 posts)We don't do security reviews, he mentioned, we do investigations. That word is even in our name: Federal Bureau of Investigation. (paraphrasing what he said since I do not have exact quote)
Sam
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)What does that have to do with my noting the omission of GOP from the title?
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/fox-news-obama-hillary-clinton-fbi-224143
I will answer my own question. Nothing.
Now that we got that housekeeping out of the way.
As I have said, ad infinitum and ad nauseam, I will defer to the legal opinion of the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department:
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans
and not that of random internet posters with axes to grind.
DSB
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Yet have no problem referencing the opinion of the vice presidential pick of the Libertarian party?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Or are you going to try and pretend that isn't true?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)BTW, I have a serious question. What grade for transparency do you give me? Do I get an A for refusing to camouflage my contempt for those pushing this story?
Trump is pushing it right now. I'm watching Hardball.
Thank you in advance.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)When those opinions happen to run contrary to your own opinions. If they back up your own argument, then they're completely fine.
I understand completely now. As for a grade for transparency, given your complete unwillingness to admit you just quoted a right wing source, your grade is rather low.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)There will be no indictment. The sadness that brings you and your cohorts brings me much glee... I can only compare it to a sexual high.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I can only hope you find something in your life that gives you genuine happiness rather than gaining pleasure through others hurt.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)I only gain pleasure from the misfortune of others when their pleasure is derived from the misfortune of others , i.e. when those they want to see fall don't.
If the righteous weren't rewarded and the unrighteous weren't punished the moral universe would not be in order.
Call it a kind of karma.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Even if those people were the worst people in the world, it's still a bad sign to enjoy their suffering because it means you have that capacity inside you. Glad they don't achieve what they set out to achieve sure, and sad that they wanted something negative, but there's never an excuse for taking pleasure in pain.
okasha
(11,573 posts)I saw the Indictment Fairy yesterday, in Lady Cottingley's Pressed Fairy Book.. The remains were terribly mangled.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)This is a banner day for me...All my nemeses are in one thread... I am going for a walk soon...I would literally rather get hit by a car and not return than capitulate.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)If you find such unsavory tactics appropriate there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion...
Again, this is great...All my nemeses in one place...I feel like the Christians of yore who were fed to the lions but in this instance the Christian is winning.
I'm bearing this crucible for our nominee and I can't feel better about what I am doing.
Hills, I'm doing this for you.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Not his responsibility to see to it that people click on it.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)but there's nothing hidden and that is a fact.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)I know many times the writer of an article doesn't write the headline but the seminal poster still misrepresented somebody elses work product.
still_one
(94,723 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Sad to see GOP talking points used on this site.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Cannot wait until we get rid of gop plants and rightwing talking points.
I have literally been reading about her impending indictment since 1994.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)They genuinely like each other, even after their bitter contest. I don't think the man has a vengeful bone in his body. He is almost too good for this world.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)How one loses shows their mettle. That's why I had no prob voting for her regardless of the last contest and the water under the bridge.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)Even though the contest was acrimonious when it was over she did everything she did to see he was elected, even dressing down her own supporters , some of whom refused to come along...
It's like family...We fight, but at the end of the day we're still family.
BTW, did you see Bill's eulogy at the GOAT's funeral...
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I plan on watching late tonight
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)I am a believer so I believe I will finally get to meet him on the other side along with the martyred Kennedy brothers, Brother Malcolm, Dr, King, and Abraham Lincoln...
MineralMan
(146,948 posts)There never was. That was a Republican pipe dream that sent secondary smoke to some on the left.
There still won't be either. It has nothing to do with Obama's endorsement. If there were any real chance that Hillary Clinton would be indicted, she wouldn't have been a candidate. We are all just guessing about the investigation. The right is pushing the idea that she'll be indicted.
Guess what? The Administration knows the reality of that. It has always know the reality of that. It's all just a warmed over Benghazi situation. Lots of smoke, but no fire.
Get over it. It's not happening. It was never going to happen. It's all just wishful thinking by people who dislike Hillary Clinton for whatever reason.
This country is not going to indict and prosecute a Secretary of State for actions taken while serving in that capacity. It simply will not happen. It never has and never will. Nothing of the sort would ever be allowed, I guarantee.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)MineralMan
(146,948 posts)or "sources close to the investigation" to decide, either.
But, there's still not going to be any indictment.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)MineralMan
(146,948 posts)of that song. You go right on with that. I don't care, and it won't make any difference.
I'm basing my assessment on history, actually. If indictments were likely for such cabinet officers, we'd already have seen some. I can think of several examples from other administrations where they should have been. They weren't. We don't issue criminal indictments for cabinet officers who are acting in their positions. We simply don't. It's a precedent nobody wants to set.
That's why no indictment will be issued, nor even considered seriously. Do think about it, OK? Use your sense of history and your knowledge of the past.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)emulatorloo
(45,453 posts)FBI isn't leaking, so there's nothing but speculation until the report is released.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)You don't perceive yourself as in denial. Which is kind of prerequisite for being in denial.
charlyvi
(6,537 posts)But it won't work. They clutch at the straws they have, not the straws they wish they had. They will be waiting on an indictment well into Hillary's second term.
MineralMan
(146,948 posts)I'm going to be busy, soon, working to defeat Trump and elect our first woman President. By November, I'll be 71 years old. It will do my old heart good to have helped elect both a black man and a woman as Democratic Presidents. Yes, it will.
Others can cry all the bitter tears they can muster. As David Byrne sang, "I ain't got time for that now..."
scscholar
(2,902 posts)I'll believe it when I see it in writing.
apcalc
(4,488 posts)tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)you have more patience for this than I do. Bravo for trying to insert some facts into this nonsense.
MineralMan
(146,948 posts)DUgosh
(3,091 posts)yodermon
(6,147 posts)load & clear MM
MineralMan
(146,948 posts)They appear nowhere in my post. To imply that they did is dishonest.
Thank you for your cooperation in not putting words in my mouth.
yodermon
(6,147 posts)which i'm sure you're aware of. Here is your quote:
"This country is not going to indict and prosecute a Secretary of State for actions taken while serving in that capacity"
.. even if those actions are found to be criminal?
Because if she gets a pass just by virtue of being SoS, then yeah, it's frost/nixon 2.0, and there is one set of laws for those in power and another set of laws for the rest of us.
MineralMan
(146,948 posts)I'll appreciate it if you do the right thing. If you don't, then I'll keep pointing it out. Do not fake quotes from other DUers. If they didn't say it, don't act as though they did. I choose my words carefully. I recommend that as a normal practice.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)The idea that someone running proves nothing is wrong is completely flawed.
vdogg
(1,384 posts)"The White House's admission that the FBI is investigating Hillary Clinton's email server as a 'criminal' matter shreds her dishonest claim that it is a routine 'security inquiry,'" RNC spokesman Michael Short said in the statement.
But Earnest seemed to be describing the White House's practices in general terms, not characterizing the case as a "criminal" investigation. Asked to clarify, the White House noted that Earnest has previously said that he had "not talked to anybody at the Department of Justice with knowledge about this situation" -- meaning that he would have no way of knowing whether the investigation was indeed criminal.
Guess you guys have decided to abandon all pretense. "Fuck it, let's go for broke"
floriduck
(2,262 posts)onenote
(43,842 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)The FBI only looks at criminal activity, not civil. That's a fact.
TwilightZone
(26,893 posts)This isn't complicated.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)and we hear this on a daily basis from many how the FBI investigation is a RW witch hunt.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)"I want her so I'll just close my eyes, ears, and thought processes and hope it all goes away." Well nine or so months later, it hasn't gone away. But her supporters don't want to hear facts or use logic. They just blindly stopped considering the possibility.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)If you don't mind I will defer to the legal opinion of the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department and not a random internet poster with an axe to grind:
Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans
Now, about that water:
floriduck
(2,262 posts)So he's calling you and your drivel out. Work it out with him. I'm busy.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)The FBI investigates...The Justice Department prosecutes...Two different entities. Glad to be able to point that out for you.
You're welcome.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Glad to be able to point THAT out to you. Then the Democratic Party will look like ridiculous crooks. Now you don't want THAT do you?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)If you believe you know the relevant law better than the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department:
But then there was a moment where former Governor Weld shattered Republican dreams and Donald Trump's talking points about Hillary Clinton's email.
Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans
there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.
About that water:
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)The only people that'll actually give a shit are people hoping and praying for Clinton to get indicted. That would be the majority, if not all, Republicans, some Independents (which are actually Repubs) and some Sanders' supporters.
You know what else? The majority of the people that voted and helped Clinton win the Democratic Primary... they were aware of this matter (and anything else anyone wants to trot out).
You know what happens when you continually vilify someone? No one with a lick of sense believes the boy who cried wolf when the wolf has been found innocent time and again.
840high
(17,196 posts)truth - either way it falls.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)You and your cohorts should know by now you will never get the best of the indomitable DemocratSinceBirth. He would literally rather die.
840high
(17,196 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans
I would literally rather have a cap busted in my ear than to ever give into to you and your lil cohorts.
Maru Kitteh
(28,702 posts)pretending otherwise is daft.
840high
(17,196 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,634 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)to come clean. She could in one moment clear everything up...if it were above board. Good lord, she's got the entire Democratic Party elite, PBO included, now "carrying water for her". That doesn't change one thing...just shows the depth she is willing to go to having "supporters" shill for her.
And don't give me the VRWC BS ... She is a Democrat. We are Democrats. These are her actions. She made decisions. And a good half of us think they suck.
The problem is that now they really have some red meat. So howl away. You'll have plenty of time and opportunity.
Hav
(5,969 posts)Let's be fair and name the source: "Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) disagreed with Earnest's assessment, posting on Twitter that Obama's endorsement does constitute a conflict of interest. Cornyn said a special counsel is needed to properly investigate Clinton's email use."
floriduck
(2,262 posts)My point is the FBI IS treating this as a criminal investigation. Not like a security review that Clinton and her supporters said for months. They were wrong then and her supporters who deny a possible indictment might be wrong again.
bigtree
(88,716 posts)...something which has not been established.
Also, an investigation of criminality is not proof that criminality occurred - something that Sanders and his supporters have been asserting for months.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)playing the foil to the Clinton Shuffle. No, that's the Democrats doing that. Pontificating with super duper hubris on the future...nice work if you can get it.
"Sander's Supporters" are not deaf and dumb (as in refusing to talk). That would be the 5th Ammendment guy and we'll see about the aides. But hey, nothing to see here.
When it's over...cleared up...she's exhonerated (which she's far from at this time), then we talk and I'll likely vote for her. Until then, it's just so much jibberish and Corporate Dem PC.
bigtree
(88,716 posts)...I get that it's just a way to take her down politically, but you can't credibly throw in every disagreement you have with her into the rumor mill and expect to be taken seriously.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)It's the "you can't touch me" that qualifies. And no, I have no desire to "take her down". Save your hyperbole. She's doing that herself. I pray she is cleared, post haste, frankly. It's making the Party look like an extention of the Clinton Shuffle....Bill's bull horn notwithstanding.
I guess now the FBI is just a rumor mill. That silly Comey...thinks he's something.
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)I'd love to read one HRC supporter express even the slightest bit of hesitation or concern around this pending investigation. They all seem to be star struck.
What concerns me even more, if there is a recommendation for indictment a lot of her supporters still won't care and then we will be truly hosed.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)not the cooperation needed by the parties to enable that. And one can only believe...at least a non-cult person...that there is a lot to hide.
Truth be told, her supporters will just parrot whatever she says. This type of blind adoration skips the frontal cortex of the brain. I do feel for the real Democratic leaders and how they've been pressured into joining the Clinton Shuffle. Any form of cover is gone. All the while she's asking for Republican funds. Now the only defense is "RW Talking Points" or "Not Trump". Sad.
It's either pure incompetence and ignorance, or extreme hubris and political privilege.
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)I think the latter part is the truest part -
"It's either pure incompetence and ignorance, or extreme hubris and political privilege."
I hope we live to see this house of cards (pun, somewhat intended) come crumbling down.
bigtree
(88,716 posts)...much less indicated any crime has been committed.
So, yeah, talk to the FBI, don't blame Clinton for others using the inquiry as a political cudgel.
from Fiscal Times:
...legal experts have told the Associated Press that it appears unlikely Clinton would be formally charged with committing a crime for using her private email server throughout her four years at the State Department, in contravention of revised rules regulating highly sensitive email transmissions. Thats because the relatively few federal laws governing the handling of classified materials were written primarily to cover spies and leakers. Whats more, prosecutors would have to prove intent to violate the law and expose classified material to hacking, which would be a stretch at best.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)They don't usually "declare" anything or state a crime has been or has not been committed until the "investigation" is concluded. We are not elementary school children here.
This is a very balanced article, IMO, probably because it's really Yahoo.finance.news. Surprised you linked to it. It definitely shows the difficulty she has created in a number of federal departments...semantics aside...and the difficulty of Obama's position and the difficulty of political appointees like Loretta Lynch. Probably because it's really Yahoo News.
It's not going away anytime soon. That's for sure.
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)How long is this shit going to last?
I think the President might know a bit more than you on this.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)Hopefully not after the 15th....
BTW, I lived on Blair Stone Road when I was doing post grad- work at FSU.
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)I lived there for about 15 years in the Killearn area. Awesome to see another former TLH resident!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)Did you ever have Tom Dye as a professor? Monte Palmer?
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)I spent most of my time in Biology and Chemistry...lived at Dirac. So sad that the Koch Bros essentially took over the COSS though.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)SIGH
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)hence having to live at Dirac, LOL!
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)You know how he clenches his jaw...that's how it was expressed. No influence or knowledge...that's what he said. Maybe you know better?
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)Obama, Biden and Warren are smarter than that.
TwilightZone
(26,893 posts)John Cornyn and Fox News.
Quite the sources ya got there.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)DU by leaving
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)onenote
(43,842 posts)(Except for DC which isn't going to be a good night for you). As for what your primary opponents will be doing--we will be working to defeat Donald Trump in the GE.
What will you be doing?
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)have to cover them" crowd. Remember, first she goaded Allbright and Steinham into well-named cover, now it's gone all the way up to the President. That's freaking power. Perhaps just extreme hubris so far over that there is no way back, perhaps.
And still the investigation into Her Server and Her Emails and Her Actions with the FBI keeps going. Oh I forgot, the VRWC secretly runs the FBI. Otherwise, it would be over. Right.
And apparently it was the Benghazi Hearings that the secret server came up. I don't think even PBO can keep the lid on this. It's a long way to January...when he returns to civilian life. I learned to really like him and it really pisses me off.
yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)Skink
(10,122 posts)I want to know who is gonna pardon who for which crime.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)There is a legal concept known as "the presumption of innocence." You'd be surprised at how often individuals who are indicted for crimes are found to be Not Guilty by a jury of their peers.
Since there hasn't been a criminal referral to DOJ, an indictment, a trial or a conviction, no pardon is needed.
You're about a year and a half premature.
gordianot
(15,414 posts)He resigned before impeachment and got a pardon before an investigation. Ford proved just about anything is possible when it comes to pardons. How many underlings from the Nixon administration got real jail time? The pardon fairy when it shows up is much more powerful than the indictment fairy ask several Governors sitting in jail today.
randome
(34,845 posts)2. Maybe you're wrong about the investigation being something to worry about.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)forever...and now this? It's not going away, until it goes away.
But his endorsement never goes away, either. Nor do all the other Establishment Democrats. Anyone who thinks all these lifetime politicos are having a Hillary Nomionation Party behind the scenes aren't paying attention. JMHO,
TheBlackAdder
(28,634 posts)On Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:13 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Obama's Endorsement Undercuts Clinton FBI investigation.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512171788
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
This person explicitly adopted the GOP spin on this for their thread tittle--the article notes the GOP is claiming Obama's endorsement undercuts the investigation, and all the OP did is edit out the fact that it was the GOP saying it. This is Republican troll.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:18 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Jesus Horatio Christ: How many of these "HURTFUL" suppressions of speech are going on today? KNOCK IT THE FUCK OFF! Grow the fuck up or visit the RomperRoom site where your FeeFees won't get hurt!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Spend your energy posting your thoughts in response instead of trying to hide it. Better to know what's out there.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: DU is not the place for adopting GOP talking points.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)I kind of find his lil diatribe risible.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)pointed out. Interesting reply.
TwilightZone
(26,893 posts)That's a pretty good example of how not to be a juror.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)We know you're VERY, VERY disappointed, but she's not going to be indicted. This is not a criminal investigation and there was no crime. It's not going to happen, even if you hold your breath and turn blue in the face.
Most importantly - BERNIE LOST.
HILLARY GOT MORE VOTES = MORE PEOPLE VOTED FOR HILLARY THAN VOTED FOR BERNIE
HILLARY IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE
OBAMA ENDORSED HER
BIDEN ENDORSED HER
ELIZABETH WARREN ENDORSED HER
MOVE ON!
onenote
(43,842 posts)I guess that because you subscribe to that spin.
Which is interesting.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Geez, I was about to misread the post through those first few...seemed pretty relevant, in a manner of speaking. Had to do a double take.
But that last one...that just whacked all the DUers that are not in the Clinton Bubble. There are a lot of us here she doesn't fool one bit.
Now, back to the post...
senz
(11,945 posts)Kind of funny that a Hill fan is using it.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)But I'm done with these fools. They aren't interested in how Clinton is viewed by so many. She doesn't want or need our votes. That's been made clear by her followers.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Long, long time until November.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)jamese777
(546 posts)to believe that a Democratic Attorney General (Loretta Lynch) appointed by Barack Obama and a Democratic U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia (Channing Phillips) appointed by Barack Obama are going to indict the Democratic Party's nominee between now and November?
Even Judge Curiel in San Diego, who Donald Trump has attacked, has postponed the Trump University trial until after the election (November 28th).
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)wait till they can like the 'foundation' some how.
We are facing a 4 year non-stop clusterfuck of: Hearings, Subpoenas, grand juries, special prosecutors, impeachment attempts,
and endless media circus
jamese777
(546 posts)Bill Clinton was even impeached and tried. It didn't stop him from completing two terms in office with the highest job approval rating of any two term president in the modern era.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)It's been a neocon tag-team match
Wild BIll set the stage for what followed.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)regardless of the damage it does
jamese777
(546 posts)is the United States Senate, only 100 members allowed. Bernard Sanders is a member in good standing and he participates in the 46 member Democratic Caucus.
senz
(11,945 posts)Bernie is not and has never been in that club.
Hill and Bill are firmly in it, both having and serving great wealth. It's their love. It's their life.
You mean Bernie doesn't accept the $174,000 a year salary plus fringe benefits which bring total compensation up to about $250,000 per year; he isn't ranking member on the Budget Committee and he doesn't caucus with the other Senate Dems?
ANYONE in the United States Senate is in a very exclusive club, only 100 members.
senz
(11,945 posts)You padded his income from $174,000/year to $250,000.
Bernie has served the people, and not the oligarchs, his entire career. He gets paid the going rate for a Senator and he doesn't take all the perks and bribes that so many others do. He's not on the take.
He doesn't live like a king/queen like your idol does. Bill and Hill are sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars and that's not counting their very questionable "Foundation" which has even more money.
Your idol lives for money. She gives favors for money. She is owned by Wall Street. She is obscenely rich.
Your hypocrisy is contemptible.
MFM008
(19,952 posts)a lawyer such as Barack Obama would risk everything with such an endorsement for HRC
if he wasn't sure she would be cleared of wrong doing. I find that mind boggling.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,975 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)he acted in good faith. It's not his fault what she does.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Definite denial of plausibility, if needed. He's no fool. But she has haunted him for 8 years, that's for sure. She got filthy rich and he's going to be an ex-president making a great living...but no wealth and grifter cash. I grew to respect him tremendously.
libodem
(19,288 posts)stonecutter357
(12,753 posts)Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)Administration.