MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree
The plutocracy has decided not to indict Hillary Clinton - and Donald Trump predicted it days before it was announced. So the Republicans are going to have a field day with this fiasco - and right in the middle of a general election.
.
It's going to be an absolute circus, because the GOP knows it's their only chance of winning. They’re going to bring up former President Bill Clinton’s “impromptu” meeting with Attorney General Lynch during the climax of an FBI investigation into his wife, Hillary, and just days before she was interviewed by the FBI. They're going to bring up the fact that President Obama not only endorsed, but began to schedule campaign events with Hillary even before the FBI investigation was complete, and they’re going to bring up the fact that according to a NY Times report Hillary insiders let it be known that she intends to retain AG Lynch as her Attorney General if she's elected president - quite a timely leak. In addition, there’s the lawsuits currently pending against Hillary and the Democratic National Committee for the election fraud that was allegedly committed against a fellow Democrat, and the Republicans are going to congressional hearings into the FBI investigation of Hillary, giving them access to over a year of FBI reports into her reports into her activities. For those who insist that Hillary's clean so it's no big deal, you should ask yourself why her IT expert, Bryan Pagliano, found it necessary to take the 5th amendment over 125 in a 2 hour deposition. What was he worrying about incriminating himself of? And again, all of this is going to be paraded before the American people right in the middle of a general election - and Hillary already has atrocious disapproval ratings. so Hillary has become a gross liability for the Democratic party.
.
DO WE REALLY WANT SUCH A PERSON AS
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!?
.
And the problem is, Democrats are not going to be able to just fluff this off as just more GOP shenanigans, because this situation warrants the congressional investigation that's sure to come - even I want to know what went on behind the closed doors of this political bureaucracy. And again, I'm sure that the Republicans are going to make absolutely certain that the hearings are scheduled in the middle of the general election. So with all of that baggage, Hillary Clinton - who was one of the most disliked, and distrusted politicians in America even before this fiasco - is definitely a liability to the Democratic party.
.
Yet, as was reported in a previous article, for months Clinton Supporters have been saying that all true Democrats have a responsibility to the liberal cause, the Democratic Party, and to America to get behind Hillary Clinton in order to prevent Donald Trump from becoming President of the United States. They've been lecturing Bernie Sanders supporters incessantly on how important it is to do the "responsible thing" and put their partisanship aside in support of the bigger picture. Well, now we’re going to see if they were actually sincere in their selfless, and supposedly, single-minded effort to save America, or if it was just a lot of political posturing in an effort to gain support for Hillary.
.
Bill’s behavior alone has given the Republicans something to hang their hats on. When all of these things are combined, this situation could create a furor of Watergate proportions - and in the middle of a national election. It could also destroy President Obama’s legacy. It's shocking that President Obama would even allow himself to be placed in such an untenable position. There are many people in this country who will never look at him the same way again - and that's especially going to be the case after this blows up - and it is going to blow up. The Republicans are going to see to it. So Bill and Hillary Clinton’s irresponsibly reckless behavior could very well throw the election to Donald Trump.
And even though Hillary wasn’t indicted of a crime, if the phone rings in the White House at 3 a.m. in the morning, who in America would want people who have demonstrated such flawed judgment answering it? I certainly wouldn’t - and in this writer's opinion, anyone who would has become so partisan that they’ve lost touch with reality.
.
Hillary’s reckless disregard for national security is indefensible, and Bill’s recent behavior of dropping in on the Attorney General while his wife was under active investigation, and committing public voter fraud by casually strolling into a polling place in Massachusetts, is grounds to make one wonder if he’s becoming senile. It’s either that, or as a Princeton study indicated, America is no longer a democracy.
.
The study says that America has become so thoroughly taken over by the plutocrats that the average American no longer matters. Maybe that explains why neither Bill, nor Hillary, no longer feel the necessity to hide their reckless behavior. But due to the sibling rivalry between the Republican plutocrats, and the Democratic plutocrats, all of this is about to come out, and in this case, to the gross disadvantage of the Democratic party.
.
.
So the question to be asked of Clinton cultists now is this - how important is it to defeat Trump Now? With all of Hillary's political baggage, along with the fact that her IT expert, Bryan Pagliano, saw fit to invoke the 5th amendment over 125 times in a 2 hour deposition, and then adding to all of that, Bill Clinton's thoughtlessly poor judgment, Hillary Clinton could dump Trump right into America's lap, because there are a lot of people - even Democrats - who are just not going to be able to get themselves to vote for this woman, Trump or no Trump. So should Clinton supporters do the "responsible thing," put partisanship aside, and ask Hillary to drop out for the sake of the nation? If they’re anything other than self-serving hypocrites, they will.
.
Eric L. Wattree
http://wattree.blogspot.com/
[email protected]
Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Comments
All right, that's enough of this Wattree. You may criticize Hillary all you like, but these jibes against "Clinton cultists" and "self-serving hypocrites" are just thinly veiled ad-homs against your fellow dagbloggers. Make your point without the insults, or don't make it here.
by Michael Wolraich on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 4:29pm
Michael,
Everything is not about Dagblog for me. Dagblog is just one place out of many that I post to. I have this stuff posted all over the internet. What I'm saying is my opinion on this issue. Google it.
by Wattree on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 5:50pm
In that case, you have plenty of other places to malign people with whom you disagree. But if you wish to publish your opinions at dagblog, leave out the insults.
by Michael Wolraich on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 7:34pm
There was a comment made that things were over regarding the investigation because Hillary could not go for 3.5 hours without telling a lie. She would lie to the FBI and be indicted. I guess that position has changed.
by rmrd0000 on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 5:45pm
Listen carefully and you'll hear the sound of one goalpost moving.
by Austin Train on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 6:10pm
Or, perhaps that opinion was just plain old wrong.
by CVille Dem on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 6:13pm
I'm batting a .1000. Over a year ago, regarding Clinton's home-brewed email server, I wrote a relatively long post here that came to an identical conclusion, using the same reasoning, as the Inspector General who found Clinton violated federal regulations.
Nevertheless, I subsequently wrote Clinton probably would not and should not be indicted because her peccadillo did not rise to the level of a federal crime.
Given my track record, it would behoove folks to take very seriously my opinions and to change theirs when they differ with mine unless they can articulate convincingly why they should not.
So what's my opinion on this whole mini-scandal? Clinton may not have committed an indictable offense but she acted carelessly, secretively, dishonestly, and with callous disregard for federal regulations. She's a poor choice for President but because so many Democrats mistakenly voted for her in the primaries, we have no choice but to support her given the unspeakably horrible alternative.
Her supporters have a duty to acknowledge their error and to couch their support for her in soft tones befitting the flawed inadequate candidate with whom they have saddled us.
by HSG on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:00pm
That's fucking hilarious.
by Ken flynn (not verified) on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:07pm
Hal your judgment includes supporting people who repeated posted video rants supporting Bernie Sanders and agreeing with a Sanders supporter who bought the Mena, Arkansas myth.
by rmrd0000 on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:17pm
At this point Clinton supporters are not in the mood to make any concessions to Sanders supporters. Sanders lost. Sanders appeals mainly to a subset of white voters. Sanders and his supporters need to figure out what they need to do to have broader appeal. If Sanders and his supporters feel that they can gain political clout with only white Sanders supporters and white Independents they will remain a minor political voice.
Democrats have made their selection.,Sanders supporters can either figure how to work with those who currently make up the Democratic Party or they can continue to create division between themselves and the Democratic Party. Sanders is not going to be the candidate. If you are not enthusiastic about Hillary, that is fine. Just stay out of our way with your nonsensical and self-serving attacks on Hillary Clinton. Obama campaigns with Hillary. Biden campaigns with Hillary. Warren campaigns with Hillary. If Bernie wants to defeat Trump then tell him to shut the Hell up. We are tired of Sanders. Democrats have a wider population to address then the sliver of the population represented by the whiny BernieBros.
If need be, don't let the door hit ya.
by rmrd0000 on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 10:02pm
And a year ago we told you your candidate sucked and he couldnt win and he got wiped out by millions of votes and most of the serious states with real primaries. Yet you keep pitching that crotchety old bastard like he was the second coming of christ. You're batting .000 where it counts, but you never seem to notice. Toddle on now - you didnt even get yourindictment. Game over. Perhaps you can annoy the Green Party a while, see who can out-purity who.
(PS - your ".1000" means 1 out of 10, but of course you knew that)
by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:28pm
your ".1000" means 1 out of 10, but of course you knew that)
In the army we used to call that "fucked it up right this time."
by ocean-kat on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:32pm
Good catch O-K if I may continue the baseball metaphor. You're absolutely right I misplaced the decimal point and it wasn't an accidental error. I went back and forth for a while on where to put it. Of course it has to follow the 1 but then it would be batting 1 (one) not 1,000 right? Nope. That's baseball convention.
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 8:28am
As the great Yogi Berra noted, baseball is 90% mental and the other half physical. Give it 100%, and if that's not enough, give what's left.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:26am
You're right Hillary supporters should speak up now that the investigation is over.
I'd like thank all Hillary supporters for ignoring this partisan witch hunt when it was clear from the beginning there would be no indictment. As Josh Marshall posted today, "We Have the Final Word; And It Was Friggin' Obvious."
There won't be any charges against Hillary Clinton or anyone else in the 'email server scandal' which has played such a huge role to date in the 2016 election. It is important to understand what James Comey said. The relevant statutes are broad enough that lots of people could conceivably be charged under them. And there are occasional cases where prosecutors do use that expansive nature to charge people they really have no business charging. But, as Comey said, "no reasonable prosecutor would bring" charges in this case.
What is most notable about this news from a political and news perspective is that this outcome was entirely predictable, indeed almost inevitable, based on the facts that were publicly known about the case.
Good work Hillary supporters for keeping a level head while others were flailing about.
by ocean-kat on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:30pm
Comey didn't address over-classification, nor the number of times the administration leaks stuff it wants out, nor the number of times they reclassify stuff that's already publically known. Not perfect, but close enough compared to the damage that can be done with info in the hands of Republicans.
ETA: EmptyWheel addresses the people who are in jail for stupid government security overreach: https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/07/05/does-jim-comey-think-thomas-drake-... (Petraeus not being one of them).
by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:47pm
Comey is a republican who donated to the McCain and Romney presidential run. Rather than obsessing over his partisan bitching the headlines should read, "Not Even Republican Can Find Reason To Indict Hillary"
by ocean-kat on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:50pm
Hillary aside, there are people in jail were revealing how to use a 30-year-old rotary phone among other dark arts. Our intelligence operations need reform and better adherence to law and oversight. Unfortunately I don't think this is high on the list.
by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 10:14pm
THANKS hILLBOTS !!
aMERICA wAS SO rEADY TO eLECT A BIG GOVERNMENT TAX RAISING BEADY EYED SOCIALIST WHO PROMISED FREE STUFF PAID FOR BY BILLIONAIRES! tHANX
Now all we got is the candidate Obama says can keep the GOP from trashing his last 8 years and the nation..
[& good points OKat]
by NCD on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 10:53pm
Yes, I know PP, but I'm so tired of talking about it that all I can work myself up to do is snark. Aren't you tired too? Back in the day I posted a few articles describing the mess that is our classification system and how officials have to regularly work around it just to get their work done. How there are a dozen different agencies that look at the same document and come up with vastly different classifications. Non-classified documents sent today become classified documents tomorrow when a different agency looks at it.The adage that the government would classify a ham sandwich is so close to being true that it's not even a joke anymore. And as your article, and others I've read, claims some people get caught up and punished in that failed system for what appears to be ridiculous reasons.
In the midst of this political season with Sanders still unable to deal with the fact that he lost in a landslide and some of his hard core supporters are gazing dreamily at him while visions of sugar plums dance in their heads I just can't work up the energy to try to have a serious discussion about it.
by ocean-kat on Tue, 07/05/2016 - 11:05pm
Yeah, understand. Save it for a rainy day (when that ham sandwich will come in handy...oops! Divulging secrets again...)
BTW, from Comey: “While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified email systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.”
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:32am
I was so angry in 08. It was such a bitter fight, down to the wire. I was invested. I was disappointed but there was a sense of relief when Hillary lost and then almost immediately endorsed Obama. It was over and every one took a step back. There was a lull when many didn't post, until we re-engaged. I'm just waiting for that lull, that little break where we all take a breath. But I guess it won't happen for three more weeks. All we're gonna do for the next three weeks is fight about Hillary and Sanders. /shrug Oh well.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:45am
This isn't about Hillary and Bernie any more. There's no more fighting over who'll be the nominee. It's Clinton. I'm not going to waste time and effort trying to convince anybody to vote for Bernie. This exercise for me is an academic one. Given yet more evidence of Clintonian perfidy, can we please please pretty please move past the hagiographic treatment of this flawed candidate and have an honest discussion about the election to come which is between an insider/corporatist/militarist and a wholly repulsive neo-fascist buffoon.
Why is this important? Two interrelated big reasons: 1) So those of us on the left have credibility in the next election cycle - if we champion Clinton as a hero and she turns out to be the morally compromised mediocrity all signs suggest she'll be, we'll have little moral or intellectual standing when promoting candidates in future election cycles. 2) When/if Clinton's 3rd way moderate/center policies flop - as such policies always do - cf., e.g., Obama's ongoing "free trade" experiment and the ever-growing wealth disparities in America today - we want to be in a position to say I told you so.
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:23am
As Yogi Berra might have said, "I'm behind her 100% even though she's a terrible candidate and I know she's going to fail".
What do you want, a sticker for November that says, "yeah, I voted for Hillary but I didn't mean it"? We're not providing a hall pass or letter for the teacher for you.
If you think she's so shitty, stay home, take up knitting or raw food preparation or learn to walk on stilts. Life's too short. And if those on the left can't figure out who Hillary is/was 4 or 8 years from now, then maybe they're too stupid to vote.
You go have the "honest" discussion you want and I'll go with my version of "honest', and I presume everyone else here will do the same. Maybe it's about time you just accept that others don't see things the way you do.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:34am
After making Trump their candidate we should have no trouble claiming the high ground compared to the GOP, even if our nominee was Toonces the Cat!
by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 12:13pm
Oh please. She's a lousy candidate but the alternative is much worse. Staying home would be immoral and unpatriotic.
Regarding your claim that I need to "accept that others don't see things the way [I] do." Of course I accept that. My understanding is we post here to hash out ideas and disagreements and come to some kind of consensus. I am always prepared to be wrong and to revise my views the instant the evidence on which I rely is discredited. If it started getting really cold and the glaciers began to grow, I would reconsider my acceptance of anthropogenic global warming. I believe the evidence that Clinton is a very poor choice is very powerful but as I have noted on many occasions, I could be wrong and am prepared to change my opinion when evidence supports such a change. What evidence would change your opinion that she is an outstanding choice?
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:23pm
" I am always prepared to be wrong and to revise my views the instant the evidence on which I rely is discredited." - no, you're not. It's a self-congratulatory line, but we see from social media that most people completely buy into their stances and are unwilling to change, and from everything I've seen from you, it looks like you're more stuck than most. As for me, I like Clinton for her bad qualities - her ability to piss people off especially, including the ones I want pissed off - along with standing up on poverty, female and family issues, racism, health care, as well as wading into the difficult area of hardball but compassionate foreign policy. I like her speeches, I like the way she's typically organized, I like her attention to detail at least in terms of paying attention to people's needs, getting back to them, and forming policy - including eye-on-the-prize rather than spreading out too thin. I certainly don't care whether she's banging her secretary, male or female, would be disappointed if she were more on the take than the normal run of politics requires but can't say I really care - I'm more interested in heavy fund-raising, advertising and down-ticket support to take back the House & Senate. If that means knocking off a few people in a back alley or knocking off a bank, well, sometimes that's how we get control of a situation. See Godfather II.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 3:22pm
If you disagreed with President Sanders, he would have the FBI give your address to the gun manufacturers so they could take corrective action. No one is allowed to disagree with Bernie Sanders.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 3:50pm
Here's evidence that Clinton may not be as bad a President as I fear she'll be. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-debt-free-college_us.... See I am always open to revising my views. What would cause you to revise your views?
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:29pm
If our view that Hillary will be a good/ great President is correct, why would our viewpoint need revision?
You are the one siding with people who believe the Mena nonsense and those posting delusional random video rants. The more we see the non-arguments made by the anti-Hillary forces, the more we believe our choice was correct. Republicans will dump all sorts of garbage on her. If you goal in life is going to be to laugh at the garbage being dumped, then why vote for Hillary? We already have the sore losers filing frivolous lawsuits.
The rest of us will be pointing out flaws in the attacks. For example, there are the contradictory statements made by Comey yesterday:
http://thedailybanter.com/2016/07/heres-why-hillary-clinton-isnt-a-liar-...
We are going to be gearing up to fight the coming assault on the Democratic nominee. It looks like you will be a part of the assault. It is tiresome to have to address nonsense, but we know that will see the nonsense from the sore loserSanders supporters in Philadelphia.
Sanders lost, Hillary won because.................Scoreboard. Democrats are ready for battle against the Republicans. It looks like you are preparing for battle against the Democratic nominee.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:53pm
How about you just stay on the sidelines with Bernie Sanders while we work to get Hillary elected. You consider Obama a failure. He is a failure with a 56% approval rating.
If we had followed your advice and selected Bernie Sanders, a ton of minorities would stay home because Sanders is uninspiring to them.
We really don't need your advice.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:39am
Please provide one scintilla of evidence that I believe Obama to be a failure. I pointed out where some of the policies he successfully pursued have failed. Do you believe all have been successful or do you believe he has been a failure?
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:24pm
Your first choice for President wanted a primary challenge to Obama.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:56pm
He was troubled because Obama was prepared to cut social security payouts to seniors. Did that trouble you?
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 8:21pm
Honestly, Hal, you're something else. Just when I try to give you the tiniest benefit of the slightest doubt you write a comment like that. I'll allow credit for understanding that Bernie is irrelevant at this point, but seeming to request that any future discussions feature Hillary's flaws, mistakes and "morally compromised mediocrity" in order to appease your version of honesty is on its face a non-starter. And you know it.
by barefooted on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 12:05pm
???? Is there some reason you can't acknowledge how badly she screwed up on the email server and so many other stuff as well? Why should accepting the truth ever be a non-starter?
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:27pm
Hal, we don't care about the damn emails.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:55pm
Accepting the truth and demanding your version of it from others are two entirely different things.
by barefooted on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 3:16pm
I base my "truth" on Clinton's violation of federal regulations regarding her exclusive use of a private email address and failing to preserve her emails at the State Department. I rely on my own analysis which was corroborated lock, stock, and barrel by the Inspector General and the FBI. Upon what do you rely for your "truth" on this matter?
by HSG on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 8:26pm
Apparently Comey misrepresented the # of Hillary's servers and mobile phones - what else did the FBI get wrong? Sometimes it's best to wait for 2 smoking barrels. I know "Inspector General" sounds impressive, but if you've met 1 or 2, they're pretty run-of-the-mill government functionaries. Well-paid too.
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 07/07/2016 - 6:18am
[Comment removed by moderator]
by Austin Train on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:20pm
As I read it part of that is that the State department is more time dependent with offices scattered across the globe. Ambassadors need to exchange information and get instructions from Washington and the present system is so cumbersome that it sometimes needs to be circumvented to do the work.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 2:53am
Since the State Dept is talking to a wide range of players, vetted and not, often in same meetings, it would likely be a big cramp in their style and effectiveness to be continually deciphering which info is classified to what level or not with legal responsibilities over it. I never got the idea that Wikileaks hurt State so badly - may have given them a chance to say responsible things in public that they couldnt otherwise (corrupt Mideast officials et al)
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 3:15am
My first reading of the Manning leaks was that it was mostly frivolous information, not important that we know, that could damage relations and cause discussions between leaders to be less open. But I kept waiting for news organizations that read the documents to make a good case that there was some actual fall out over it and no one did. I've changed my mind and come to agree with you.
That's a big part of my lack of worry over the possibility of Hillary's server being hacked. Over classification and a lack of transparency is such a problem in Washington that it would probably be a good thing if her server was hacked and those over classified documents were released to the public.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 3:51am
Agree.
My friends-even the most conservative - who like me have been in the military and/ or worked in the defense industry agree the government would classify a ham sandwich.
by Flavius on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 4:37pm
My friends -even the most conservative -who have been in the service or the "defense industry" agree
the Government would classify a ham sandwich.
by Flavius on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 4:45pm
by Wattree on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:38am
The wingnut channels do a better job of blasting Comey.
Hillary wasn't indicted for lying to the FBI.
Some people probably needed to change "draws" after the decision
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:45am
Error
double post
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:47am
.
I’ve been researching the Clintons for over 20 years, every since they conned the Black community into selling blood for them and then cut our throats as soon as they entered office. Many journalists consider me an expert on Tavis Smiley and Cornel West. They routinely contact me as part of their research whenever they do an article on either one of them. Well, I know twice as much about Bill and Hillary Clinton, because I’ve been researching them for twice as long - In fact, Tavis’ strong support of Hillary over Obama in 2008 is what caused me to start researching him and West. It is my position that ANY Black person who supports Bill and Hillary Clinton is the direct equivalent of a civil rights worker supporting David Duke. They either have an agenda, or they are a low-information voter - at least with respect to the Clintons.
.
.
Bill and Hillary Clinton are conservatives in drag. Hillary is the closet Republican that she’s always been (President of the “Young Republicans in college), and Bill is a White Southern Dixiecrat. They’re just slick, and they saw which way the wind was blowing in the sixties, so they took advantage of it. One of Hillary’s campaign supporters when she was running for the senate was the Koch Brothers. James Comey, the head of the FBI, who didn’t indict her in spite clear evidence that she committed several crimes, is a Republican. So we’re being played - again. And so you won’t fluff it off, notice that the investigators were Clinton supporters, so they tried their best not to make him look so bad.
.
So tell me, where is the wiggle room?
.
https://youtu.be/epXVDEn3gsQ?t=505
by Wattree on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 5:09pm
.
I’ve been researching the Clintons for over 20 years, every since they conned the Black community into selling blood for them and then cut our throats as soon as they entered office. Many journalists consider me an expert on Tavis Smiley and Cornel West. They routinely contact me as part of their research whenever they do an article on either one of them. Well, I know twice as much about Bill and Hillary Clinton, because I’ve been researching them for twice as long - In fact, Tavis’ strong support of Hillary over Obama in 2008 is what caused me to start researching him and West. It is my position that ANY Black person who supports Bill and Hillary Clinton is the direct equivalent of a civil rights worker supporting David Duke. They either have an agenda, or they are a low-information voter - at least with respect to the Clintons.
.
.
Bill and Hillary Clinton are conservatives in drag. Hillary is the closet Republican that she’s always been (President of the “Young Republicans" in college), and Bill is a White Southern Dixiecrat. They’re just slick, and they saw which way the wind was blowing in the sixties, so they took advantage of it. One of Hillary’s campaign supporters when she was running for the senate was the Koch Brothers. James Comey, the head of the FBI, who didn’t indict her in spite of clear evidence that she committed several crimes, is a Republican. So we’re being played - again. And so you won’t fluff it off, notice that the investigators in the video were Clinton supporters, so they tried their best not to make him look so bad. But the facts are the facts. And this is not just some video thrown together by Clinton haters; this is an over 2 hr. documentary with news footage of the time. It's not even about the Clintons. They're just involved. One of the reporters in the video won a Pulitzer Prize.
.
So tell me, where is the wiggle room?
.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 6:54pm
West and Smiley expert...........Blah Blah.......Reagan..........Blah Blah .........Mena...........Drugs..........Koch Brothers.....Comey .......Blah Blah...........FBI investigators..........TILT!
Today's word salad is brought to you by Sanders Unicorns Inc. serving up pipe dreams and rhetoric from D.C. since 1990.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 5:31pm
by barefooted on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 5:40pm
by ocean-kat on Thu, 07/07/2016 - 1:45am
Of course, 70-80% of blacks are Klan members for liking a politician. Feel weird yet?
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 07/07/2016 - 2:22am
A LOGICAL FALLACY
.
You judged something as either good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it came.
.
This fallacy avoids the argument by shifting focus onto something's or someone's origins. It's similar to an ad hominem fallacy in that it leverages existing negative perceptions to make someone's argument look bad, without actually presenting a case for why the argument itself lacks merit.
.
Example: Accused on the 6 o'clock news of corruption and taking bribes, the senator said that we should all be very wary of the things we hear in the media, because we all know how very unreliable the media can be.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 7:01pm
Some arguments present their own merits for why they're simply bad.
by barefooted on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 9:01pm
We all judge the origins of things presented as facts. People have seen and rejected the supposed evidence regarding drug running in Mena, Arkansas. After judging the nonsensical evidence, some people may then assess the person presenting the data as solid fact.
The fact is that many people have tired of the constant attacks on Hillary Clinton put forth by hardcore Sanders supporters. Most of us no longer care what Sanders does regarding endorsement. We have Obama, Biden, Warren, Sherrod Brown, John Lewis, and Al Frankenstein on our side. Sanders is a non-issue. Apparently, Sanders got booed at the platform committee. Sanders can't even remember Wolf Blitzer's name. We don't need Sanders, he has passed his sell by date.
Most of us post links to support our positions. We do smile at the pretty pictures and video rants that hardcore Sanders supporters post.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 10:08pm
by Wattree on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 8:01pm
[Comment removed by moderator]
by CVille Dem on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 8:45pm
Scroll past his crap...
Sam Wang - Princeton Election Consortium
As of July 7, 12:02AM EDT:
State polls: Clinton 317 EV, Trump 221 EV
Meta-margin: Clinton +3.16%
Clinton Nov. win probability: random drift 65%, Bayesian 80%
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/06/30/the-2016-presidential-meta-anal...
~OGD~
by oldenGoldenDecoy on Thu, 07/07/2016 - 12:40am
DO WE REALLY WANT SUCH A PERSON AS
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!?
by Wattree on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 8:53pm
Republican FBI Director says what?
Didn't see the question before. The answer is a resounding
Yes!
Is your problem with her that she has baggy eyes? Because she is certainly highly qualified.
by CVille Dem on Wed, 07/06/2016 - 9:19pm
I'm shutting down this comment thread due to an escalation of personal insults
by Michael Wolraich on Thu, 07/07/2016 - 6:49am