GT40s.com Paddock Politics Thread

[Pat]

Bzzt, fail. You can't pick and choose what parts of the FBI's conclusions you agree with. FBI said no one been prosecuted in the past for carelessness like this, which was the primary reason they were not recommending it here.

What that when Director Comey said this?

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

I guess in a "Clintonion" sort of way, to make it a true statement that "no one's been prosecuted in the past for carelessness like this" one would have to parse the term "like this" to mean no other presumptive Democratic Party nominee named Clinton who sought to evade public and congressional oversight with construction and use of a private email server "like this" has been prosecuted... In that case you're absolutely correct.

Sooo, carelessness is OK when you putting top secret information in and unsecured and unauthorized location - if you're a Clinton. But then even Clinton National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was prosecuted on misdemeanor charges for "carelessly" stuffing documents from the National Archives down his pants.

As for others, ask Marine Major Jason Brezler, Bryan H. Nishimura, or for that matter David Patraeus.

I was personally hoping Mrs Clinton would be called to account for her actions and the Democratic Party could then have gone to someone more tolerable like Vice President Biden or Mr. Webb. Either would have been preferable to me than Mr. Trump. But it looks like we'll continue the national race to the bottom in presidential politics.
______________________________________________________________
On a somewhat related note, some of you might find this amusing...

From the DOJ website.

"All Department of Justice employees are subject to the Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. 7323(a) and 7324(a), which generally prohibits Department employees from engaging in partisan political activity while on duty, in a federal facility or using federal property. Political activity is activity directed toward the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group."

______________________________________________________________

Lotsa quoting from the presser, except of course for the ultimate conclusion, which the pissed off white guy contingent no likee. Oh well.

I'm not sure why some of these posts always seem to devolve into some sort of name calling. What's with the need to denigrate others? I don't agree with some/many/a few of those that post but I certainly believe most have honest motives. Some of those same individuals have shaped my opinions on many issues and socially I would probably consider friends. But when it gets personal, for me, credibility and persuasion diminish rapidly. I wish it would stop.

 

[Larry L.]

FBI said no one been prosecuted in the past for carelessness like this, which was the primary reason they were not recommending it here.

Violating the pertinent security statutes alone was grounds for indictment. Being "careless" and/or lacking "intent" to violate the statutes does not constitute a legit 'defense' for having done so any more than "ignorance of the law".

In Billary's case, it's not possible she 'UNintentionally' did 99% of what she did...like destroying emails, installing her own private, unsecured, unauthorized server...instructing her underlings to scrub 'classified' markings from documents before emailing 'em to her ...burning her schedules...sending/receiving Top Secret/S.A.P. info over her server, etc.

As a lawyer, you ought to know all that...and I'm sure you do. You've just chosen to ignore those things...like Comey.

 

[Steve]

Doug, you are correct, it will be interesting to be sure. The topic at hand wasn't Trump, though, it was Clinton's strong proclivity for lying and acting as though the rules and laws don't apply to her, as well as the sequence of events (Attorney General meets Bill Clinton at an airport, AG gets busted and states she'll defer to the recommendations of the prosecuters, FBI head states HC acted irresponsibly and broke the law buuuuuut he recommends no charges and leaves without taking questions, immediately follows up with a joint Obama/HC rally in Charlotte, NC). Coincidences? Hmmm. She has demonstrated profound lack of integrity, even for a politician. You seem excited at the prospect of voting for her. I find that disturbing. While I can understand an objective assessment on the part of a democrat stating "Hey, she's the lesser of two evils and her political agenda is closer to mine than the other nitwit" that wasn't your approach. Anyone who votes for her and doesn't feel a strong urge to take a shower upon leaving the voting booth has some serious issues him/herself.

Oh, and "Puti" is short for "Puti-poot", which was Dubya's nickname for the Dick from Russia.....and the W is nomhere near the M on the keyboard.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Hmmmmm.

 

[Larry L.]

Hmmmmm.

Obviously, there IS a higher sense of 'honor' in a GOP crook than can be found in a Democrat crook.

The GOP crook resigned...

 

[Doug S.]

Doug, you are correct, it will be interesting to be sure. The topic at hand wasn't Trump, though, it was Clinton's strong proclivity for lying and acting as though the rules and laws don't apply to her, as well as the sequence of events (Attorney General meets Bill Clinton at an airport, AG gets busted and states she'll defer to the recommendations of the prosecuters, FBI head states HC acted irresponsibly and broke the law buuuuuut he recommends no charges and leaves without taking questions, immediately follows up with a joint Obama/HC rally in Charlotte, NC). Coincidences? Hmmm. She has demonstrated profound lack of integrity, even for a politician. You seem excited at the prospect of voting for her. I find that disturbing. While I can understand an objective assessment on the part of a democrat stating "Hey, she's the lesser of two evils and her political agenda is closer to mine than the other nitwit" that wasn't your approach. Anyone who votes for her and doesn't feel a strong urge to take a shower upon leaving the voting booth has some serious issues him/herself.

Oh, and "Puti" is short for "Puti-poot", which was Dubya's nickname for the Dick from Russia.....and the W is nomhere near the M on the keyboard.

I am only excited about voting for her because she is not a Republican...the worst possible political scenario I can imagine is for the Repubs to control both houses of the legislature and also the White House.

Had never heard the "Puti-poot" thing, but Gee-Dub was the WORST POTUS ever, IMHO...

If we ever needed a female POTUS, I would have voted in a heartbeat for Condyleza Rice...

Oh...I don't have a keyboard...all my posts are typed with my index finger on my iPhone

Cheers!!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

Well, folks, it's all over but the crying and gnashing of teeth. FBI director Comey has accepted the recommendation that Hillary not be charged with any crimes over her use of a private server.

As I understand it, the sticking point that caused that decision was that the element of "intent" was not proven...no evidence Hillary INTENDED to cause harm by using a private server.

Repubs are holding a hearing right now, claiming a double standard, but the bottom line is that there is no proof to meet the "standard" of intent.

Much ado about nothing...smear tactics, plain and simple.

Routine American politics, plain and simple.

...time to get over it, folks...life goes on and you find a way to be happy, I always say.

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

Wow...watching the congressional hearing now...what a witch hunt!!!

The Repubs would rather see Comey burned at the stake than admit that he did as expected by the American people...that he use his (admitted by the Repubs) considerable expertise to make a determination that charges would or would not be advisable.

He did...and now the Repubs are attacking him for doing just that...a classic example of sour grapes!!

What a circus...and what clowns the Repubs look like in changing horses in the middle of the stream, so to speak.

No Cheers for them!!!

Doug

 

[Randy V]

Something like this NEEDS a Congressional Hearing and ruling - not the ruling of a single individual who is not empowered to judge anyone or anything. His recommendation was made and the Congressional Hearing should take that into consideration - but to just flat out dismiss the issue without a full Congressional investigation is ludicrous in my opinion..

 

[Doug S.]

Congress is not responsible for "micromanagement"...the government hires capable and knowledgable individuals, carefully vetted, for director level positions and entrusts them to use their best judgement to run their departments. Comey is no exception, and if I had to guess I would say that the vetting process for director of the FBI is more rigorous than many other departmental directors must endure.

Repubs are simply unhappy that there is no smoking gun and are doing their best to create one.

Just curious, Randy...have you been watching this modern version of the "Spanish Inquisition"? Keep in mind Comey is a Republican (I think...heard one of the political talking heads say so, if memory serves me right).

This smells...and not good!!! Take it from a well experienced oenologist (fancy term for someone who makes wine), sour grapes stink to high heaven...and so does this "inquisition".

The gold standard for determination of legal culpability is "intent" to conduct their practices in a manner that is harmful to the United States, and even Comey admits that level of intent is not present.

The Repubs are attempting to engage in congressional micromanagement, IMHO, and this witch hunt should never have been called...it is clear to me that it was NOT called for.

Your opinion may vary, and apparently does...thank goodness we have the freedom to even engage is this sort of discussion! :thumbsup:

BTW...Comey was just asked if he viewed the committe's proceedings as a witch hunt---he said "No". He is quite obviously much more gracious than I would be if I had to endure the level of twisted questioning the committee is practicing.

Cheers!!

Doug

 

[Bob Fechter]

Comey: "Hillary’s FBI Testimony Wasn’t Under Oath Or Recorded, But It Would Still Be a Crime To Lie."

Don't take my word for it, listen to the video of comey saying it.

Comey: Hillary's FBI Testimony Wasn't Under Oath Or Recorded, But It Would Still Be a Crime To Lie - Breitbart

 

[Bob Fechter]

"Curiously, Berger, Lynch and Cheryl Mills all worked as partners in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson, which prepared tax returns for the Clintons and did patent work for a software firm that played a role in the private email server Hillary Clinton used when she was secretary of state."

Read more at Comey has long history of Clinton-related cases

 

[Doug S.]

What the hell are the Repubs thinking?

Newt Gingrich for Trump's VP?

Have they forgotten that Gingrich was one of the most reviled GOP members back in the day? The only worse choice they could make would be Rush Limbaugh.

The possibility Gingrich could become POTUS should some unfortunate demise befall Trump will assure that Clinton wins, not that that is a bad thing, mind you...IMHO, of course!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

Well, well, well...anyone watch Melania Trump's speech at the RNC? Seemed pretty inspirational...
...but not original...seems she plagiarized Michelle Obama for a portion of it...word for word . It has been the lead story on the Today show this morning...will probably be all over the airwaves today, so if you don't trust NBC just watch your favorite network.
Unbelievable!!!

Doug

 

[Pat]

That's a great point Doug. Then we can agree that it should be automatically disqualifying for any spouse of a presidential candidate to lie to the American people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTPVe6-Pso

I wonder if this was the first time Mrs. Trump was proud of her country.

Either way, I'm definitely not voting for her.

 

[Keith]

Well, well, well...anyone watch Melania Trump's speech at the RNC? Seemed pretty inspirational...
...but not original...seems she plagiarized Michelle Obama for a portion of it...word for word . It has been the lead story on the Today show this morning...will probably be all over the airwaves today, so if you don't trust NBC just watch your favorite network.
Unbelievable!!!

Doug

I think you've been had Doug. It's clearly a media stunt and it has worked - very well.

 

[Doug S.]

That's a great point Doug. Then we can agree that it should be automatically disqualifying for any spouse of a presidential candidate to lie to the American people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTPVe6-Pso

I wonder if this was the first time Mrs. Trump was proud of her country.

Either way, I'm definitely not voting for her.

No...not disqualifying...and I'm not voting for her, either...nor is anyone else.

My point is that we should have expected better from the Trump organization, and, more importantly, from the Republican Party. Her speech should have been (and probably was) previewed and "vetted" (for lack of a better term) so that it would not have brought any negative attention to this important event. This is, after all, the Republican's big party, and the party is responsible for whatever is presented.

If this is all that the Republicans can offer...we don't need them.

...all MHO, of course...and yours will differ, of course.

Doug

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

They should sack the speech writer, Melania would have had know idea that it was a copy of a previous speech.

 

[Doug S.]

Too little, too late, Pete.

If this is the best the party has to offer, can we trust them to propperly vette ambassadors, Supreme Court Justice appointments, candidates for appointment to any number of offices?

It would appear not

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Jack]

Well, we will all see what the future brings. I'm hopeful.