BLACK LIVES PROTEST TURNS MASSACRE
5 COPS SHOT DEAD IN DALLAS

Ahhhhhh So THAT'S the "real commitments against the police" that Democrats and (O)BLM are looking to add to the Democrat Party Platform..

Michale

OK, I promise to read them all this weekend, how's that?

Sigh.

-CW

is that clear enough for you?

"Crystal... "
-Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

:D

t's just that the evidence she didn't lie is pretty conclusive, so it takes quite a bit more mental gymnastics to claim that she lied than to claim that bush did.

Only if one is partial to one particular political ideology agenda over another...

In other words, if one supports Hillary and doesn't support Bush...

Or vercie vicie...

to be perfectly clear, the opinion that hillary lied about the e-mails is also a valid opinion to hold -

Thank you.. I'll accept that and we can move on...

Michale

Do you agree with that?? Yes or no??

no.

is that clear enough for you?

BUT my opinion does not mean that the opposite opinion is invalid, nor that a person holding that opinion is not worthy of support, which is what you tried to turn it into.

JL

El Chapo would have been a better choice...

Michale

I know you would..

That's what makes it so scary....

Michale

And there you go again, having to dis-assemble everything so it makes you look like you are not doing something that might make you unpopular amongst your peers...

The general accusations from the Left was that Bush lied..

Do you agree with that?? Yes or no??

Or you can dis-assemble what the definition of 'is' is..

Michale

It's all about REPUBLICAN vs DEMOCRAT.....

beg pardon. i'd take hillary's worst judgment over the best judgment of the CURRENT republican nominee.

JL

there you go again, taking a point of agreement and transforming it into a different point on which we don't agree. i do not believe the evidence supports the assertion that bush lied about iraqi nukes. if someone else believes it, i'd have to assess their argument and the facts supporting it than knee-jerk refusal to listen or accept their view as valid.

a point of disagreement doesn't mean a person is an idiot or not deserving of support. that goes for you too.

JL

Exactly...

It's all about REPUBLICAN vs DEMOCRAT.....

That's all that matters...

Congrats on #500.... :D

Michale

But none were marked 'classified', and the three that were questioned in that regard were incorrectly marked with a classified (c) symbol (in an email attached to an email which was part of an email chain).

I think that there is reasonable evidence that she believed those statements, and has reason to continue to believe those statements today.

I find it incredible that the inference that Hillary would have known the exact classification status of every statement made on every attachment to every one of over 30,000 work related emails is even entertained as coherent. I find it unbelievable that an error rate of 1/2 of 1% is considered 'careless'.

as to hillary's judgment, her mistake was serious but not unusual for political appointees in government. i'd take that over the judgment of the republican nominee any day of the week and twice on weekends.

ONE MORE!!!!! :D

Michale

Fine.. IF we were talking about poor judgement (the kind of poor judgement shown by Hillary Clinton) then you would have addressed my point...

But we're not talking about poor judgement, we're talking about lying...

There is no evidence to support that Bush lied..

Why can't you call a spade a spade and just come out and say it??

Why all the tip-toeing around what the definition of IS is???

Michale

i don't, i accuse him of poor judgment, AND the clear-as-day consequences of that poor judgment are still being felt in what used to be iraq, as well as by families of the deceased.

JL

the key qualitative difference between carelessness and negligence is whether or not there is HARM.

the key qualitative difference between negligence and gross negligence is whether the actions are TYPICAL.

if a doctor performing surgery forgets a suture and the tissue heals without it, there's carelessness but no harm - therefore it's not negligent.

if the tissue doesn't heal, the patient gets internal bleeding and further surgery is required to fix it, then it's negligent.

if the same doctor treats the same patient again and tries to suture her with a staple gun from home depot, causing paralysis then it's grossly negligent.

these distinctions aren't in statute, they're in the case law.

clinton's actions, though careless, were not negligent because comey couldn't prove harm, and were not so atypical of other state department actions as to make them grossly negligent. to meet that standard in the case law, it would have taken a snowden-level leak, and ironclad, smoking-gun proof that an adversary actually received the information.

JL

Ya know?? Why couldn't you Democrats get someone more honest as your candidate for POTUS??

Like maybe Jimmy Hoffa?? Or Whitey Bulger??? Or Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán???

Jesus......

Michale

Then, if you don't know, you CAN'T accuse him of lying, nor can you support anyone else who accuses Bush of lying..

Right???

my view that hillary was not lying about the e-mails is based on director comey's statement - there was no apparent intent to deceive about the 113 out of over 32,000 emails that she missed (less than half a percent). since he is intimately familiar with the facts of the case, i believe i can trust his assessment that clinton's false statements about the e-mails were honest mistakes, at worst attempts to hedge, but certainly not lies.

OK, so we agree that Hillary didn't really lie when she claimed she turned over all her work emails. Honest mistake and all that..

Comey said during the hearing that Hillary WAS untruthful (IE LIED) when she claimed she didn't send or receive classified emails that were classified at the time..

Your comments???

And, since you seem to be accepting of Director Comey's word on everything (kudos to you), what's your take on Comey's statements that Hillary was not sophisticated enough to understand classifications.... :D

Michale

Michale

FBI Director James Comey said Thursday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may not have been "sophisticated enough" to understand the classified markings on emails she sent and received, which explains why did didn't know she was breaking the letter of the law.

In other words, Hillary Clinton was too stoopid to know she was breaking the law..

And THAT is ya'all's candidate for POTUS??

hehehehehehehehehehehehehe :D

Remember, many of us agreed that we would accept Director Comey's determination of the facts...

hehehehehehehehehehehe

This is just TOO perfect.... :D

Michale

my view that hillary was not lying about the e-mails is based on director comey's statement - there was no apparent intent to deceive about the 113 out of over 32,000 emails that she missed (less than half a percent). since he is intimately familiar with the facts of the case, i believe i can trust his assessment that clinton's false statements about the e-mails were honest mistakes, at worst attempts to hedge, but certainly not lies.

JL

I mean, considering it's the Left Wingery that is bringing the NAZI comparison...

Michale

At this point, the committee has stopped asking Comey any serious questions about his decision, and begun playing to the cameras.

Com'on... Do you SERIOUSLY think that ANYONE on that committee were ever NOT playing to the cameras!???

I know you are smarter than that... :D

Michale

Well, you weren't around here during that time...

Democrats, including virtually all of Weigantia, were calling for the CIA heads' on a platter...

I could also link to news report from the time, but why bother..

makes statements that reveal contempt of the Geneva Convention and basic Human Rights,

Terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Conventions nor are they deserving of human rights, so I am not sure where you beef is....

and threatens physical harm to anyone who opposes him in Cleveland.

Ya mean like all the Left Wingers and their threats of physical harm against Trump supporters???

Admit it, he sounds like a Nazi.

Actually, he sounds like the guys who CONDEMN the Nazis..

But I would see why that would bother you.... :^/

Michale

As far as I know, Democrats have always been more interested in the policy failure that allowed the torture to take place in the first place.

What alarms Democrats lately is the cheering that we hear when Trump echoes the words and attitudes of brutal dictators, makes statements that reveal contempt of the Geneva Convention and basic Human Rights, and threatens physical harm to anyone who opposes him in Cleveland. Admit it, he sounds like a Nazi.

Yer kidding, right???

It is the people who ordered the torture that should be held to account.

So, the people who actually committed the torture....

Democrats never wanted them prosecuted..

Seriously, is that what you are saying!???

Michale

I must have missed that 30 million dollar investigation. I don't believe that any CIA agent has been prosecuted for torture, or that anyone has seriously suggested such prosecution. It is the people who ordered the torture that should be held to account.

You mean like Democrats did when they pursued CIA agents for torture...

Oh wait.. "That's different"....

Of course it is.. It's ALWAYS "different" when Democrats do it...

:^/

Michale

Funny how you don't attack Comey for spending all that money and time investigating??

How come??

Oh that's right.. Because he said what you wanted to hear.. :D

I am assuming you have never served in the military or held a security clearance...

I have, so you're not BS'ing me with that one.

You still never clarified which one is applicable...

Michale

All the Republicans can do, after spending 30 million dollars and coming up with bupkis, is to promise more prosecution.

No???

What a pity....

Michale

Rather ironic that Hillary is going to be charged with the same charge her husband was impeached over.. :D

Michale

That's it...

Michale

http://www.politico.com/blogs/james-comey-testimony/2016/07/clinton-untrue-statements-fbi-comey-225216#ixzz4Djy3kSCz

Michale

As far as I know, a transcript hasn't been released... If you have a link, by all means...

Michale

Or, watch the hearing ...

False.

Your evidence??

Michale

It doesn't show....

As a matter of fact, Comey said that the entire State Department was, is, and has been always extremely careless in handling classified intelligence.

If we were talking about the ENTIRE State Department, you would have a point..

But we're not, so you don't..

No, I'm saying that partisan intent must be taken into account,

Except when it's Demcorat intent... :^/

I do wish that EVERY ONE was a non-issue, but unfortunately, I think that there are actually many fundamental questions still left to be answered by the Bush Administration

Of course you do... That's my point..

Michale

I have, so you're not BS'ing me with that one.

The SecState doesn't get to pick and choose which ones are REALLY classified and which ones are not..

Really? Who does? A clerk at CIA? A captain at the Pentagon? Jason "oops I outed the CIA" Chavitz? Which official in the intelligence community outranks the Secretary of State?

Clinton was "EXTREMELY CARELESS" in handling classified intelligence..

As a matter of fact, Comey said that the entire State Department was, is, and has been always extremely careless in handling classified intelligence. More infighting. I would like to see how their record stacks up against the record of the GOP members and staff of the House Oversight Committee. It wouldn't be pretty.

Are you saying that because there is partisan intent, then it's a non-issue??

No, I'm saying that partisan intent must be taken into account, especially when the GOP House Majority Leader publicly admits that the Benghazi Committee (from which E-gate originates) was a vehicle for banging on Hillary, as Kevin McCarthy did last October. This was shortly seconded by other Republicans, such as Rep. Richard Hanna (R-NY), who said, “This may not be politically correct, but I think that there was a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and an individual, Hillary Clinton.” A former staffer for the committee claimed that he was fired for not wanting to focus on Clinton. And on, and on...

If that is your position, then you must agree that EVERY Bush investigation mounted by the Demcorats... EVERY ONE was a "non issue"

I do wish that EVERY ONE was a non-issue, but unfortunately, I think that there are actually many fundamental questions still left to be answered by the Bush Administration, many of which still wouldn't be comfortable for the GOP. For instance, about support for the morally abhorrent practice of torture, which is being touted as a feature, not a bug, of the Trump campaign.

False.

What you wrote above, Michale, is not accurate, in any way, shape or form.

It is accurate to the best of my ability....

Once the transcripts are released, we can confirm...

However, the gist of what I wrote is completely accurate...

Michale

Michale

Michale,

If we are going to use this thread to quote question and answer from the hearing now in session, then we should be accurate.

What you wrote above, Michale, is not accurate, in any way, shape or form.

He tried to equate Colin Powell's use of AOL occasionally with Hillary setting up her own private server...

What a moron....

Michale

Like I said... Comey's recommendation is not the end.. It's just beginning.. :D

Michale

FBI Director Comey: Yes.

Michale

Also: notice how fast these two committee hearings with Lynch and Comey were arranged? Apparently, the argument that 'process takes time' only applies when it's something that the American people need desperately.

So, let me ask you..

If the House was under Democrat control and Comey had recommended indictment of Hillary do you think:

A> That Democrats wouldn't have hearings JUST AS FAST??

and

2> YOU would mock the Democrats??

You see the point??

Michale

THIS IS FACT....

The decision to revoke her and her staff's security clearances is a logical, rational and common sense decision....

The decision NOT to revoke her and her staff's security clearances is solely, utterly, unequivocally and completely a POLITICAL decision...

Michale

OK, you admit you were wrong.. Thank you..

Again, 110 out of 30,000 (there were 60,000 total) is less than 1%. *Yawn*

I am assuming you have never served in the military or held a security clearance...

Those classified stamps are there FOR A REASON..

The SecState doesn't get to pick and choose which ones are REALLY classified and which ones are not..

Especially when those designations came agencies outside of the State Dept...

*ESPECIALLY* when those outside agencies are INTELLIGENCE agencies..

Clinton was "EXTREMELY CARELESS" in handling classified intelligence...

That disqualifies her from being POTUS and explains EXACTLY why her and her staff's security clearances will be revoked..

D'Ya think? No partisan intent there..

Are you saying that because there is partisan intent, then it's a non-issue??

If that is your position, then you must agree that EVERY Bush investigation mounted by the Demcorats... EVERY ONE was a "non issue"...

You can't have it both ways.... It's not allowed.. :D

Michale

And the reason that Comey keeps referring to email 'chains' is that, apparently some of the 'owning agencies' determined that in those cases, even though there were no emails marked classified, the Subject Matter the chain was about should have been classified. More bureaucratic infighting, in other words.

Again, 110 out of 30,000 (there were 60,000 total) is less than 1%. *Yawn*

Who hear want's to accept THAT reality???

{{{chiirrrrrpppppp}}} {{chirrrrrppppp}}

:D

Michale

You ready to concede that Director Comey said this:

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.

Until you admit you were wrong, we have nothing to discuss...

Michale

I do accept reality..

But you also must accept that same reality..

And THAT reality is, when the Director of the FBI says that several someones who were "extremely careless" in handling classified information, then those several someones SHOULD have their security clearances pulled..

THIS is the reality that, apparently, you can't accept..

. Furthermore, she is likely to be the next president

I thought you wanted to talk about REALITY?? :D

d to continue the line that she should have her security clearances revoked is a wholly non-serious argument..

We'll see.. :D

Michale

D'Ya think? No partisan intent there..

Spin it any way you want now: it's over. Moreover, the GOP fell for Bill Clinton's stunt at the airport and demanded that Lynch recuse herself, so now they only have one of their own - Comey - to rake over the coals about the outcome.

You have to admit it, the Clintons played the GOP like a bass fiddle on that one.

As far as security clearances go, I'll believe that the GOP is serious about that when they revoke the security clearances of Troy Gowdy and Jason Chavitz for deliberately revealing classified information during the course of the Benghazi investigation. Wasn't it Chavitz who shocked the Intelligence community by publicly outing the (previously classified) CIA station in Benghazi? Any concern about that from the GOP? nope.

The FBI report was clear: Hillary's emails were 99-point-somthing percent clean, and the less than one percent that were left didn't constitute a violation of any law. You can't even convincingly claim negligence based on a less than 1% error rate.

I'll bet that no one from the GOP brings up the chronic underfunding that the State Department suffers every year due to GOP disrespect.

Sometimes, Michale, you just have to accept reality.

The reality here is that Clinton will not be prosecuted and she is the Democratic nominee for president. Furthermore, she is likely to be the next president and to continue the line that she should have her security clearances revoked is a wholly non-serious argument.

It would be better to lay out the case for why voters should or shouldn't vote for her.

The decision to CONTINUE to allow Hillary access to classified intelligence..

THAT is politics...

Michale

Actually, they are getting them now...

But that's not the point..

With her gross negligence, Hillary has PROVEN she can't be trusted with classified briefings...

Her clearances and the clearances MUST be revoked.. Just as they were for General Patraeus and any other high ranking official who was extremely careless in handling classified material...

It's not politics... It's common sense..

Michale

Michale

Yea, I thought about that after I noticed we were up to 427 when I got up this morning...

To get back on point, we'd have to aim for 1420 and, for me, that's a bridge too far ... :)

Awwww, com'on!!! We can do it! hehehehe

Michale

As soon as Clinton and Trump are officially nominated, then they both will and should receive those very important intelligence briefings.

That would be completely missing the point.

To get back on point, we'd have to aim for 1420 and, for me, that's a bridge too far ... :)

Let's shoot for 500...

JM, I would REALLY love to see your response to #446...

Liz, Joshua I would LOVE ya'alls take on this newest development of stripping Clinton et al of their security clearances...

I mean, yea... It could be spun as nothing but sour grapes.

But considering the FACTS of Clinton's et al gross negligence vis a vis mis-handling classified information...... Stripping them of their clearances is fully and completely justified...

Michale

OUCH... That's gotta hurt... :D

Michale

A high-powered group of senators officially petitioned the State Department Thursday to suspend the security clearances of former Secretary Hillary Clinton and her top aides -- a move that could effectively kneecap her preparations for the White House.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/7/gop-petitions-state-dept-cancel-clinton-aides-secu/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWkRGa09ESXpNREl4TWpoayIsInQiOiIxdk55OFZkanp3bzJVYzV2elFzbGZJS2Y4OEFnemI3XC9ScnM3ZHpzVUVIQmVuXC9aN1pqZmtHbloyUkRHajB1U1ZmbG12QnBUSlh6VkVyM0crZmtpNFJtXC9naFo3RUd3TmhmZlpYQU1qVUs5RT0ifQ%3D%3D

NICE!!!

VERY nice!! :D

Like I said.. Hillary is going to WISH she had been formally indicted...

The Court Of Public Opinion is now is session and THEIR indictment will be heard... :D

This is gonna be so frak'in awesome... :D

Michale

Say HELLO to The Hillary Defense...

Lawyers who specialize in representing government and military officials who’ve had security clearances revoked said Comey’s recommendation offered them a new tactic in seeking to rehabilitate their clients, especially if Clinton is elected president in November.

He added, “We’ve had people lose 20-year careers for doing less than what she did.”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article88042162.html

Michale..

Which is EXACTLY why Trump is so popular with Independents and NPAs...

He's shown that the Republican Party is useless in actually getting things done for Americans... Trump has ALSO shown that Democrats are no different than Republicans..

Out for their own greedy selves and their own self-serving agenda and to hell with the American people..

THAT is why Trump is going to win.. Because his positions are the positions of a VAST MAJORITY of Americans, GOP, DEM and NPA...

Michale

And what "real commitments against the police" are Democrats willing to do??

THAT's the dilemma that the Demcorats face..

If these commitments are satisfactory for the (O)BLM racist hate group, they will DECIMATE the Demcorats standing with decent and honest Americans...

If these commitments are acceptable to decent and honest Americans, the (O)BLM racist hate group will burn down Philadelphia...

"Well, Womack.. Looks like your stuck between The Rock and a hard case.."
-Sean Connery, THE ROCK

:D

Either way, Demcorats lose and lose BIG....

Michale

Simply not factually accurate...

Trump respects Putin as a great leader..

So do I...

Putin is 20 THOUSAND times the leader that Hussein Odumbo is...

But he is still the enemy...

Michale

"If Hillary does win the election and then starts kow-towing to Putin, then we will know as an absolute certainty that Putin has Hillary's emails... :D"

Except that Trump is the one who seems to be the slavering fan of Putin. So much so that at times he seems to be Putin's lap dog.

"It will be interesting to see how the Weigantian Hillary Clinton Pep Squad will react when the (O)BLM racist hate group starts throwing their tantrums..."

Except that it won't.

“If the platform comes and it doesn’t include a $15 minimum wage or if it’s weak about criminal justice, or if it doesn’t include some real commitments about the police..."

Because it will include all those proposals. Most Democrats running for office have already come out in support of all of those things anyway. And, unlike Republicans, Democrats actually adopt the positions that their rank and file supporters want. If they didn't. then the Democratic establishment would have their own version of Trump to worry about, just like the Republican establishment.

I know, you are going to mention Bernie Sanders. But the crucial difference is that the Democratic establishment is co-opting Bernie Sanders by adopting some of his positions. In the Republican party, it is the OTHER WAY AROUND. Trump is co-opting the Republican Establishment by making them IRRELEVANT. Trump now IS the Republican Party. The establishment didn't leave the party. The PARTY LEFT THEM.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.. But, given my military background.. :D

Do you really, honestly think that the USA was going to put troops on the ground in Crimea to stop the Russians? Because that is the ONLY thing that would have. Or that the USA was going to put troops on the ground in Syria, after our experiences in both Iraq and Afghanistan under both Bush and Obama? The American people would have had a fit!

There were MANY things that the US could do to up the ante in The Crimea and in Syria....

But Obama didn't want to do anything and Putin knew that Obama didn't want to do anything...

Regardless, here's the thing...

If Hillary does win the election and then starts kow-towing to Putin, then we will know as an absolute certainty that Putin has Hillary's emails... :D

Michale

"Re:422
Whatever helps you sleep at night.. :D
The Obama Administration got totally decimated by Putin in Syria and in The Crimea... Much more so than conventional means and "luck" would allow...
Putin had inside knowledge as to exactly what was going on in the inner workings of the administration..
Only one thing fits all the facts...
Putin was reading the State Department's emails..."

Michale, be REALISTIC. NO, it is NOT the ONLY thing that fits all the facts. I will concede that it MAY have made Putin a little more comfortable about what he was doing, but it would not have changed the how or why of what he was doing one bit.

The USA, no matter what Administration was in power, was simply never going to go to war or get involved in a military confrontation with Russia, over anything that happened in either Crimea or Syria. Neither are vital to U.S. national security in a way that existentially threaten the existence of the USA. Which is totally the opposite situation that Crimea is for Russia. And only a direct confrontation of the Russian military by the U.S. military, would have changed anything. Those are the FACTS.

Do you really, honestly think that the USA was going to put troops on the ground in Crimea to stop the Russians? Because that is the ONLY thing that would have. Or that the USA was going to put troops on the ground in Syria, after our experiences in both Iraq and Afghanistan under both Bush and Obama? The American people would have had a fit!

Because of the traitorous actions of the Democrats in the aftermath of 9/11, I am very bigoted against Democrats...

BUT....

The difference between you and I is that I recognize my bigotry for what it is and, more important, I don't let it control me..

As bigoted as I am against Democrats, I still voted for Barack Obama.. I still vote for Senator Nelson..

And, if Donald Trump had a '-D' after his name, instead of a '-R', I would vote for Donald Trump....

That's what's important..

Not letting one's bigotry be in control...

That's the difference between me and everyone else (N.E.N.) in Weigantia...

Michale

In YOUR opinion...

But it's an opinion based on NOTHING but political bigotry...

And it's going to make accepting Hillary's loss to Trump all the more difficult to accept...

Michale

Michale

The Democrats’ Black Lives Matter Problem

“If the platform comes and it doesn’t include a $15 minimum wage or if it’s weak about criminal justice, or if it doesn’t include some real commitments about the police, I think then you will see protests around these issues and forcing the DNC [Democratic National Committee] to act differently,” said DeRay McKesson, a founding member of Black Lives Matter.
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/democrats-black-lives-matter-problem/

It will be interesting to see how the Weigantian Hillary Clinton Pep Squad will react when the (O)BLM racist hate group starts throwing their tantrums...

Michale

Secrecy is a virtual religion in Washington. Those who violate its dogma have been punished in the harshest and most excessive manner – at least when they possess little political power or influence. As has been widely noted, the Obama administration has prosecuted more leakers under the 1917 Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined. Secrecy in DC is so revered that even the most banal documents are reflexively marked classified, making their disclosure or mishandling a felony. As former CIA and NSA Director Michael Hayden said back in 2000, “Everything’s secret. I mean, I got an email saying ‘Merry Christmas.’ It carried a top secret NSA classification marking.”

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/05/washington-has-been-obsessed-with-punishing-secrecy-violations-until-hillary-clinton/

Leave it to Glenn Greenwald to stick the landing... :D

Michale

It is also clearly not the law. People can read for themselves the criminal code (18 USC 793 Section f). “Gross negligence” of mishandling classified information is enough. In Comey’s own words, Hillary clearly met that standard. There is no requirement for intent or willfulness.
-John Lott

Two FACTS are abundantly clear and inarguable..

1> INTENT is not required to charge someone under Title 18 USC, Section 793 (F)

and

B> Hillary Clinton and her staff met the "grossly negligent" standard of the statute she was being investigated under....

"These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed.."
-Kevin Bacon, A FEW GOOD MEN

Michale

Wasn't it you who was slamming Trump for his alleged friendship with Epstein??

Attorneys for convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein touted his close friendship with Bill Clinton and even claimed the billionaire helped start Clinton's controversial family foundation in a 2007 letter aimed at boosting his image during plea negotiations, FoxNews.com has learned.
The 23-page letter, written by high-powered lawyers Alan Dershowitz and Gerald Lefcourt, was apparently part of an ultimately successful bid to negotiate a plea deal before Epstein could be tried for using underage girls in a sex ring based in Palm Beach, Fla., and his private island estate on the 72-acre Virgin Islands home dubbed “Orgy Island.” Epstein spent 13 months in prison and home detention after agreeing to a plea deal in which he admitted to soliciting an underage girl for prostitution.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/07/06/billionaire-sex-offender-epstein-once-claimed-co-founded-clinton-foundation.html

Like I said.. You are in a very fragile glass house with that accusation..

You might want to NOT throw stones.. :D

Because Clinton is mired with Epstein a LOT more than you could EVER hope Trump is...

Michale

Re:422

Whatever helps you sleep at night.. :D

The Obama Administration got totally decimated by Putin in Syria and in The Crimea... Much more so than conventional means and "luck" would allow...

Putin had inside knowledge as to exactly what was going on in the inner workings of the administration..

Only one thing fits all the facts...

Putin was reading the State Department's emails...

Michale

Even if that were accurate and that was what Comey said (you don't have a quote, do you?? No, you don't..) it DOES make her unqualified for POTUS...

Michale

in fact, comey seems to believe that when she said she hadn't sent classified information, she believed that to be so. i.e. not a lie, a mistake.

So, then when Bush said that Iraq had nukes, he believed it and, therefore Bush didn't lie..

Would that be an accurate assessment??

Michale

Seriously, Paula...

Could you be ANY more partisan??

The GOP is "utterly contemptible" for letting the world know how bad our IT security is??

But HILLARY is as pure as the driven snow despite the FACT that she ran a dedicated SecState private email server that makes the State Dept IT look like Fort Knox...

Seriously!???

Michale

I hate that when that happens.. My trackball button is wanky... :^(

and prepare to lose your quatloos.

Well, if anyone can do it, you can. :D

Michale

took a break to watch BATMAN VS SUPERMAN and I come back to find ya'all slackin'!!

was it as bad as they say it was?

It was tedious at times.. Over-characterization rather than jam-packed with action..

"I do like jam."
-Vala Maldaran, STARGATE SG-1

:D

It definitely wasn't an Avengers movie, but it was OK.. Give it a 6...

I was disappointed that Jason Mamoa (Aquaman) didn't have a bigger role..

Michale

Allegedly. Apparently too allegedly to justify bringing charges.

Even so, as Comey said, a handful of questionable examples out of tens of thousands of emails does not make her Ed Snowden. Apparently, Hillary used the 'proper' servers for classified communications over 99% of the time. Some criminal.

The trouble with building cases based on selectively leaked half truths is that when the whole truth emerges, the case tends to fall apart.

Literally, a house of cards.

that's not what the article says. it refers only to the two e-mails that were "marked" classified (which the other article already established as bottom-level classification - confidential information like important people's phone numbers. it says nothing about the 111 other emails that were not marked classified but contained classified information.

JL

@ListenWhenYouHear [420] - You want to hear a better one? My theory is that Bill Clinton, realizing that if Lynch decided in Hillary's favor, it would immediately be declared a political whitewash by the GOP. That would exonerate Hillary, but hang over the campaign like a drunk at a party. So he gave Lynch an excuse (or just forced her hand by boarding her plane) to take herself and all of the Justice Department lawyers (some of whom are holdovers from the Bush years) out of the decision whether to prosecute. That put the decision squarely on Comey, who is himself a Republican (appointed by Bush) of unassailable character. Why would Clinton want to do this? He presumably didn't know which way the FBI was going to come down on an indictment, but he did know that a negative recommendation by the FBI would have to be followed by Lynch anyway (otherwise the press and GOP would be screaming for blood), so taking Lynch out of the equation had no downside either way.

"How else do you explain how Putin so decidedly DECIMATED the Obama Administration in The Crimea and in Syria???"

In the case of Crimea, one word: GEOGRAPHY. The results in Crimea were going to be the same NO MATTER who was President of the USA. Crimea, before it became part of Ukraine, was part of Russia for 200 years. The population of Crimea is 60 percent Russian. Crimea contains Russia's ONLY warm water port. Crimea is VITAL to Russia in a way that would make Russia go to war for it. Other Europeans, like Germany, simply have no reason to care about it to that great a degree in the same way. One the Russians put their Special Forces in Crimea, along with the military base they ALREADY had there, Crimea's fate was sealed from the very moment Ukraine started making noises about joining NATO and the EU.

As for Syria, like many other states in the Middle East and Africa, such as Libya, Iraq, Congo, etc. it is an artificial construct drawn by European colonial powers without any regard to any realistic factors on the ground, like natural geographic boundaries or religious or ethnic communities. It is actually amazing that it managed to be a stable whole entity as long as it did.

Syria also contains, the only OTHER warm water port, that is available to the Russian navy as a base, outside of Russia itself, i.e., the Crimea.

[419} E: It's not a "lesser job" -- it's a non-partisan job. Yes, the righties go ape shit crazy so encouraging it is irresponsible.

I don't think he needed to make a fool of himself -- he just needed to present his findings without editorializing.

Thank God!

Not relevant, Paula.

It sounds like you would rather have had Comey come out and make a complete fool of himself. He was being completely transparent about the investigation and to do any less, in this unique situation, would have been a huge failure in judgement, not to mention direction of duty.

By the way, guys like Director Comey - and Secretary Geithner, I hasten to add - are the public servants who give America a good name and should be praised for their efforts, not denigrated.