home

Thursday Open Thread

I don't know where the week flew away to, it just did. I've got more jail visits this morning and afternoon, and since we can't use phones or internet once inside, it will be dinnertime before I get back to a computer.

I hope Donald Trump implodes and says some more ridiculous things. I'm really looking forward to never seeing his face on TV again.

When I get some time, I'd like to figure out what's happening with El Chapo and ISIS. If I do, I'll write it up soon.

Chema Venegas -- the thorn in the side of Lord of the Skies -- gets his own show on Telemundo around January. It's now filming. I'll be so glad when the cop shows like Narcos and Bloque del Busqada are done. El Principe was the best series I've seen all year. Even the cops and drug dealers were good guys (but not the crooked Intelligence agents (think equivalent of our CIA). Sad though that all the good people died at the end -- In Principe, there is only salt water -- tears of the sea.

It's still airing on Unimas on Demand and Hulu with subtitles if you missed it.

Other than that, I only watch James Corden and Action Bronson (F*ck That's Delicious) these days. James remains the happiest guy on TV and I get happy just watching him. I wasn't wild about Lady Gag's carpool karaoke, but I did like seeing her spend the hour in the band pit with Reggie Watts. That was a good place for her. She tried to do the monologue for James, but it fell flat. [More...]

If I really hated both candidates, which I don't, I'd write James Corden for President. I probably wouddn't be the only one to write his name in He's ineligible because he's British.)

Action, is kind of like James, in that good food makes him happier than a little kid in a candy store. The way he reacts and comes up with a unique description when he eats something really good makes watching the whole show worthwhile. I don't watch much of Anthony Bourdain because he reminds me of somone who's stuck in a 1980;s heroin trip. He's such a downer. I never stay awake through the whole show. And I think it's odd the way he eats alone so much on the show. He just seems to have a very sad existence. I hope I'm wrong. Even Andrew Zimmern has more of a personality -- and he's not all jacked up on pretend testosterone.

If you have on Demand or you tube, he did a funny monologue the night of the last debate about how much more exciting Hawaii 5-0 was than the debate. I had the episode he was talking about on my TV and he was right -- it was an unusually well done episode with twists and turns. and not much sappiness, which was starting to become the show's hallmark for a while, causing me to stop watching.

Your turn. What's on your mind today? It doesn't have to the news.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.
< The romance of the working class does not extend to nonwhites for Tweety and Biden | Trump Campaign Expending Its Last Gasp for Life on Wiener >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Celebrating the end... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 11:30:00 AM EST
    of our two year national nightmare is on my mind.  Sign the petition to put an end to the election industrial complex and start doing this dance in a sane manner.

    Oh No (none / 0) (#3)
    by FlJoe on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 12:12:35 PM EST
    say it ain't so Jill.
    Jill Stein is heavily invested in the industries she attacks on the campaign trail, including Big Pharma, defense contractors and oil companies.


    Parent
    Oops - and Stein'so answer... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 12:50:36 PM EST
    ... makes about as much sense as her explanations of her policy proposals.  She blames it on having no control over where her mutual funds put her money,  when in fact she's not required to invest in mutual funds.  Moreover, there are "green" mutual funds, which shouldn't be a surprise to the Green Party candidate.  Her purity shtick has worn thin.

    Parent
    I am no sure, kdog, (none / 0) (#4)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 12:36:40 PM EST
    that shortening the length of the campaigns is the right answer.  The pros include a shorter period necessary for metabolism of the gathered  toxins, but the cons, include insufficient time to learn about the candidates.  

     From my perspective, this was true for the Democratic primary campaign, and, certainly, for the Republican primaries, excluding the fine entertainment value.

     True, Trump emerged as driver of that clown car, but that process did reveal that the other clown contenders were awful each in his and her own ways.

     The length of the general election permitted Trump to show his stuff to a broader slice of the electorate, and it was not a pretty site.  I think time was our friend this cycle. The initial entertainment value soured and curdled. All that was left was the horror of his candidacy.  Citizens United repeal is more likely to be of value, and would, in effect, curb the major abuses.

    Parent

    Turnabout is fair play. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:54:49 PM EST
    Ukrainian activists have apparently hacked the Kremlin, and they've released a veritable treasure trove of emails and other material from the office of Vladislav Surkov, one of President Vladimir Putin's top aides.

    If authentic, these documents pretty much prove that the so-called separatist movement in the Ukraine was never really anything more than a land grab sponsored directly by the Russian government.

    I know that our attention has been focused on the upcoming election, but events right now in eastern Europe bear similar close watching on our part, with increasing reports that Russia has been mobilizing forces along the Ukrainian frontier.

    Aloha.

    From our "No Tickee No Washee" file: (5.00 / 5) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:03:52 AM EST
    (Sigh!) When all else appears to be failing in your campaign, appeal to white voters' worst instincts by resorting to racial stereotyping of your opponent.

    And so, tonight's U.S. Senate debate in Springfield, IL between incumbent GOP Sen. Mark Kirk (R) and his Democratic challenger, Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, gave us the following exchange:

    REP. DUCKWORTH: "My family has served this nation in uniform going back to the Revolution. I am a daughter of the American Revolution. I bled for this nation. But I still want to be there in the Senate when the drums of war sound, because people are quick to sound the drums of war, and I want to be there to say, 'This is what it costs, and this is what you're asking us to do.' And if that's the case, I'll go. It's families like mine that bleed first. But let's make sure the American people understand what we are engaging in, and let's hold our allies accountable because we can't go it alone."

    SEN. KIRK: "I forgot that your parents came all the way from Thailand to serve George Washington."

    For the record, Ms. Duckworth's father is a former U.S. Marine of Anglo-American heritage, and her mother is a Thai national of Chinese descent. She is in fact a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution, which requires one to trace her lineage back to that time to someone who served in the war. Her service in the Iraq War, during which she lost both her legs when the helicopter she was piloting was shot down, is well known.

    As for Sen. Kirk, a former U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who ran into trouble a few years ago for publicly embellishing his military service record, one word:

    Oy.

    That's despicable (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:11:41 AM EST
    I really hope she hands him his @$$ on election day.

    Parent
    You may get your wish. (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by caseyOR on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 11:54:07 AM EST
    Granted, election day is still 11 days away, but Duckworth is leading in the polls.

    Kirk really blew it with that snide remark. It was front page news in my small central Illinois city newspaper this morning and featured on all of the local TV news shows last night and this morning.

    Parent

    Trump calls black supporter a "thug" (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:24:07 PM EST
    Trump sees a black man waving a note for him at one of his rallies, assumes he's a protester, then calls him a "thug".

    Yep.

    A "thug".

    Says all you need to know about Donald and a large chunk of his supporters.

    Justice Dept complaint filed (5.00 / 3) (#142)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:38:50 PM EST
    The Democratic Coalition Against Trump filed a complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility on Friday against FBI Director James Comey for interfering in the Presidential election, following the FBI's decision to open up an investigation into Secretary Clinton's emails this close to Election Day. Federal employees are forbidden from participating in political activities under the Hatch Act.

    "It is absolutely absurd that FBI Director Comey would support Donald Trump like this with only 11 days to go before the election," said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition Against Trump. "It is an obvious attack from a lifelong Republican who used to serve in the Bush White House, just to undermine her campaign. Comey needs to focus on stopping terrorists and protecting America, not investigating our soon to be President-Elect Hillary Clinton."



    Eichenwald (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 10:25:17 AM EST
    has great piece up at Washington Post taking Comey to task for, inter alia, misrepresenting the meaning of the so-called new evidence.  

    Parent
    The New Yorker (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 10:55:51 AM EST
    Comey broke with Lynch

    http://tinyurl.com/h8rg7mq

    Comey can't (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:34:43 AM EST
    hide. He's going to have to come out and explain. If he keeps hiding this is going to get worse for the GOP. The FBI employees are also really ticked off at him and leaking like a sieve to the press along with the employees at DOJ. The GOP should be encouraging him to come out. Chaffetz wants Comey to hide. He said he won't even call him to question Comey. That's a big tell.

    Parent
    Another guy with a woman as his boss (5.00 / 3) (#196)
    by Towanda on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:41:17 AM EST
    who refuses to do as she requests? (read: orders)

    Parent
    True, that. (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:44:02 AM EST
    I know this is not about the (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:32:24 AM EST
    discussion du jour.....

    But it does raise the question of targeted marketing.

    Link

    Which what the "Whites Only" was about.

    Does the fact that it now uses FaceBook to hide who is included/excluded make it right?

    Seriously? (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 12:14:40 PM EST
    i dont know why people would argue with Trevor who, as a republican, is more comfortable voting for a moderate republican than trump.

    mcmullin seems pretty generic republican to me; pro border security but mass deportations impractical, pro-gun of course, strongly anti-abortion, opposes legalizing marijuana, wants to expand the military, pro free-trade globalism, lower corporate tax and lower tax on small businesses, eliminate regulations on businesses, accepts gay marriage but religious people should be able to refuse service, repeal obamacare, wants to make medicare "sustainable by creating a premium support system" (i have no idea what that means)

    Just a guess, but while that list of positions is "pretty generic Republican", there is nothing "moderate" about it at all.  Also because he's an ABCer who - while he (allegedly) isn't supporting Trump, he's pushing another,  unqualified Republican candidate.

    You realize this is a Democratic/liberal blog, right?

    Well, given Comey's (5.00 / 3) (#203)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 04:21:24 PM EST
    craven duplicity--to protect his personal honor (at least in his mind, if you take him at face value), I am no longer sitting on my arse.

    I just signed up with the Hillary folks for calling battleground states on November 7, 2016.  I think I will try to call Ohio and Youngstown where I went to high school.  I grew up with those guys, who many say are flirting with Trump.

    It is simply (4.67 / 3) (#175)
    by smott on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 07:34:33 AM EST
    Electioneering.
    He's using his bald electioneering from July to justify his bald electioneering in October.

    He's off the reservation and has been for awhile.

    Matt Miller has a good Twitter feed in this, he is ex-DOJ and if Clinton had any sense she would have him on every network as a spox from now until the election.

    Anyway, Comey needs impeached.

    Defintely. (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 08:59:43 AM EST
    Everybody let him slide in July but now he needs to either resign or face impeachment. If the GOP does not go along with impeachment then they can face the consequences of what they have been doing.

    Parent
    The Only Speculation That Makes Sense (3.67 / 3) (#147)
    by RickyJim on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:09:18 PM EST
    "Why would FBI reopen Hillary investigation unless there is evidence of more than 'extreme carelessness' in handling classified information?" Republican Sen. John Cornyn, a former Texas attorney general, wrote on Twitter.
    Some former FBI officials agreed, saying it was inconceivable to them that Comey would announce such a development because of some incremental or cumulative information in such a high-wattage case.
    "It never happens," said one former FBI official, who asked not to be named. "Once you vacate a high-profile case, unless there's some very significant omission, they won't [reopen] it."
    The source also said he doubted Comey would call attention to something that was minor.
    "Comey's not that way. He's a very practical man. It must be something that goes to the substance," the ex-agent said. "It can't be cumulative. He's not a grandstander... It's not his style."
    Another former high-ranking FBI official agreed.
    "The only reason he'd do it is if he had something very pertinent. Certainly, 11 days before an election it could well affect the outcome. It just doesn't make much sense without something very substantive," the ex-official said.

    Link

    minor detail (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:23:37 PM EST
    HE. DID. NOT. REOPEN. THE. INVESTIGATION.

    please excuse my shouting

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#172)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 04:29:38 AM EST
    There is new evidence to consider for the "old" investigation.
    If they conclude that these are just copies of e mails already examined, no problem.
    If there are any classified e mails , problem for Huma.
    Per Mark Cuban...Relax
    The highlighted paragraph in the story discussed how top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, Weiner's now-estranged wife from whom she filed for divorce earlier this year, found it to be "difficult" to print from the State Department's email system.

    "So she'd often forward emails to her Yahoo email, Clintonmail.com accounts, or even another account that she'd previously used to support the campaign activities of her husband, Anthony Weiner," the story read.

    Cuban broke his email reaction down to eight points, writing out the process he believed may have played out:

    emails went to Huma for Hillary
    Huma forwarded to acct she used for husband connected to printer
    Huma printed for Hillary
    FBI got the device Huma used with that account
    FBI is reviewing the emails on the device for classified docs
    Hillary never saw the emails just the printouts
    FBI previously reported Huma didn't get docs marked classified
    relax

    Although The Donald did predict back in August that Weiner was a security risk as he might have had access to e mails

    Parent

    Former prosecutors (none / 0) (#151)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:28:37 PM EST
    have been all over Comey's case about his behavior. First of all no case was reopened and this is about Anthony Weiner. Secondly he only sent this to Republicans????

    Parent
    Sent to the 9 Democratic Vice Chairs Also (none / 0) (#153)
    by RickyJim on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:46:53 PM EST
    but addressed to the 8 Republican Chairmen.  Here is Comey's letter.

    Parent
    That was funny (none / 0) (#152)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:30:54 PM EST
    "The "only" speculation that makes sense. " - heh.

    That was funny.

    Parent

    It has been reported (none / 0) (#156)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:29:52 PM EST
    the emails have not even been read by the FBI.

    Parent
    bleh!! (none / 0) (#164)
    by linea on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:20:09 PM EST
    "The American people are sick and tired of hearing about [Hilary's] emails... enough of the emails." -Bernie Sanders

    one needs to be a republican or a serious media wonk to imagine regular people care about this or to imagine that this silliness will help trump. he was never going to win but his own crude behavior guaranteed this. nobody cares about the emails.

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#171)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 04:22:04 AM EST
    Just check the polling swings during this election season. Whichever candidate is receiving all of the press, their polling numbers drop and their opponents rise.
    If this keeps Madame Sec's name, front and center, this will tighten up the polls.
    I fully expect another accuser of sexual assault by the Donald to emerge shortly if this continues to monopolize press coverage

    Parent
    You should expect it anyway (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 08:52:49 AM EST
    If this keeps Madame Sec's name, front and center, this will tighten up the polls.
    I fully expect another accuser of sexual assault by the Donald to emerge shortly if this continues to monopolize press coverage

    Just playing the odds, there are very likely many more that haven't yet come forward to corroborate Donald's own admissions.

    But nice try at impugning the victims.

    Parent

    Evidence (none / 0) (#180)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 09:00:07 AM EST
    Show me evidence.

    Otherwise, it plays out as Bill Clinton and his accusers played out in the 90's.

    Or Teddy Kennedy and Chris Dodd

    Correct?

    Parent

    No - not "correct" (5.00 / 3) (#181)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 09:44:33 AM EST
    Donald Trump's accuser's are confirming the behavior that Trump himself has admitted engaging in - sexual assault.

    Oops.

    BTW - Funny how you seem focused on extramarital affairs by Democrats when there are so many hypocritical Republicans - even several working for Trump.  Still having trouble figuring out the concept of consent?

    Parent

    Oh no (none / 0) (#185)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 10:46:09 AM EST
    I have seen the late Senator Kennedy in action, on the upper East Side. His bodyguards made the right move in escorting him out before someone actually called the police. (In the 1980's)

    The Kennedy Dodd affair is well documented, waitresses thrown down and strewn across their table after a night of drunken debauchery.

    Women accosted by Democrat legislators just have to suck it up, for the cause you know

    Parent

    More silly, FALSE claims (none / 0) (#195)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:38:14 AM EST
    You think someone's supposed to believe what you CLAIM to have seen, and what you CLAIM is well-documented - yet you can't provide any evidence?

    That's pretty funny.

    BTW - Please feel free to point to the video tapes where the people you accuse of engaging in $exual assault actually admit to it.  But hey - at least you're now implicitly acknowledging there's a difference between $ex and Sexual assault.

    That's some progress.

    Parent

    Except Trump confessed to (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 09:50:15 AM EST
    Billy Bush (even though he thought he was only bragging.)

    Parent
    You're dealing with people who don't (5.00 / 2) (#191)
    by McBain on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:16:53 AM EST
    need evidence if the accusations are against someone they don't like.  Total double standard. The burden of proof for any Clinton wrong doing will be sky high.  For Trump, "he might have" will be good enough.

    Parent
    Plenty of evidence (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:43:10 AM EST
    First, Trump confessed.
    Second, we have eleven (last I knew) eyewitnesses with very similar accounts.

    That's evidence, my friend.  

    Parent

    Actually, the burden of proof (5.00 / 2) (#198)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:43:28 AM EST
    ... for Trump is his own admissions, coupled with the more than dozen women who have come forward to corroborate his own words.

    Oops!

    Parent

    The Undecided Voter. (none / 0) (#1)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 11:05:49 AM EST
    Rep.Jason Chaffetz (R. UT) was pretty disgusted when hearing Trump's bragging about his sexual assault experiences and unwanted advances recorded on the Billy Bush Bus.  So much so, that he un-endorsed Trump. After all, Chaffetz owns a 16-year old daughter, and as with all his property, he must protect it against the likes of a Trump.

       Now, three weeks later, Chaffetz has thrown his daughter under the bus; he is going, he says, to vote for Trump. It may be that this public announcement does not count as an endorsement, so there is that. Or, maybe, Chaffetz has inside information that Trump will release all his tax returns which will, in a way, ameliorate, for him, Trump's Tit Tac and p***y grabbing adventures.

    If there was ever a robust incentive for ... (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 02:20:20 PM EST
    ... Democratic voters to turn out en masse at the polls and put an end to the ongoing public farce that's been GOP congressional leadership, it was Rep. Chaffetz's promise of several more years of Clinton snipe hunts, if he has any say in the matter as chair of the House Oversight Committee:

    "It's a target-rich environment. Even before we get to Day One, we've got two years' worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain't good."

    Then there's Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks, who's already calling for Mrs. Clinton's impeachment before she's even elected.

    Get your a$$es to your local precincts on or before Nov. 8, and do your part to send as many of these jackwagons packing as possible.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I can't stand the phony outrage (none / 0) (#6)
    by McBain on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 02:05:15 PM EST
    people pretending to be "disgusted" with Trump's comments as if they've never said worse. You know he never bragged about sexual assault in that recording.

    Chaffetz is probably trying to have it both ways.

    Parent

    Non-consensual (5.00 / 7) (#8)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 02:37:28 PM EST
    kissing or groping genitals is sexual assault. It may even be disgusting to some Republicans.

    Parent
    Thats a reach (1.00 / 1) (#11)
    by McBain on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 02:59:24 PM EST
    No pun intended. At no point during that tape did Trump say he did anything without consent. In fact he said "they let you do it".  These accusations have  become the typical media induced rush to judgement.

    Parent
    Yeah, they let (5.00 / 8) (#13)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 03:05:59 PM EST
    him do it.  They welcomed being grabbed by the pussy.  Married women, even stranger on an elevator.  No one respects women more than Trump.  No one.

    Parent
    The fact that Drumpf (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 04:07:36 PM EST
    thinks he can do such a thing is repugnant. No phony outrage here. He is a disgusting excuse for a human being (and I'm being generous). Luckily I know many women who would drop him in his tracks if he tried grabbing them in such a manner.

    Parent
    Did they really "let [Trump] do it," ... (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 05:35:36 PM EST
    ... or did he simply never give them a chance to say no before he pounced? Please say hello to Ninni Laaksonen, who was Miss Finland at the 2006 Miss Universe pageant, and is now the twelfth woman to publicly accuse Trump of sexual misconduct.

    Parent
    As usual (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 06:28:59 PM EST
    ...Nobody can do wrong in your eyes, except the victim.

    At no point during that tape did Trump say he did anything without consent. In fact he said "they let you do it".

    Consent.  Why didn't I think of that?  Does he ask, or is it volunteered?  How, in a normal conversation with a relative stranger, does the subject of fondling genitalia come up?  Is it a subject you broach or hear when meeting women you do not know?  

    Are you suggesting that the WOMAN says, Mr. Trump, would you like to grab me HERE?  Because I will let you, you're a star.

    The only alternative I can see is that Mr. Trump brings up the subject, and actually points out that he is a star and asks permission before he fondles the genitalia of a woman he does not know.  And you would accept that as a normal form of human social contact?

    Keep your hands where I can see them please.

    Work with me, and I'll figure out why you are not disgusted, I know it.

    Parent

    Sure, that is something (none / 0) (#32)
    by MKS on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:47:56 PM EST
    that I see happen all the time:  A strange man walks up to a women he doesn't know and just asks her out of the blue, "Ma'am may I grab your p*ssy?"   And she says, "sure thing, cowboy."

    Sure.    

    Parent

    Yes, it is s*xual assault (5.00 / 5) (#9)
    by MKS on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 02:49:25 PM EST
    I do not understand how anyone could minimize this.

    Just grab a woman like that?  That is just ordinary conduct?  Really?

    Parent

    According to that tape (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by McBain on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 03:12:18 PM EST
    who did he grab?  You're making the leap that he actually did that to a woman against her will.  Maybe you've never heard men brag about sexual encounters.... hint, they're usually BS.

     

    Parent

    You can start with ... (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 03:21:27 PM EST
    ... the 11 women who have come forward corroborating the behavior/acts that Trump himself bragged about.  Then you can move on to the women (and teenage girls) who ate corroborating what Trump himself said he did at beauty pageants.

    The only "leap" is your insinuation that Trump was lying when he claimed to do what those women and girls are Confirming.

    Parent

    Not really (3.50 / 2) (#30)
    by MKS on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:38:43 PM EST
    Even guys who talk about women in crude ways do not brag about s*xual assault.

    And most guys in locker rooms do not brag about "conquests"....that is behavior of a very few still in the frat boy stage.  Locker room talk is generally sports, and high school sports by the old bulls bragging on their sons, vacations, and sometimes money.  Grabbing women.   Nope.  Not so.

    Parent

    Uh, no. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 02:59:13 PM EST
    McBain: "People pretending to be 'disgusted' with Trump's comments as if they've never said worse. You know he never bragged about sexual assault in that recording."

    While I haven't heard worse, I will freely admit that I heard comparable talk in high school and college locker rooms, back when I played organized sports -- emphasis on "high school and college," meaning when I was between 16 and 22 years of age.

    Trump's conveying in explicit detail about how he can impose himself physically upon women by virtue of his status as a celebrity, that "you can do anything to them" including "grab them by the pu$$y," was to many people some rather graphic braggadocio on his part about committing sexual assault.

    What I believe startled most people about the "Access Hollywood" video was that the emotionally immature banter they heard wasn't the stuff of teenaged boys and early 20-somethings, but in fact was between two grown men who were then 59 and 34 years old, respectively. The vast majority of mature adult males have long since outgrown that particular phase in their lives.

    Your opinion is exactly that, your opinion and nothing more. It doesn't entitle you to accuse others of feigning outrage and disgust at Trump's behavior. And that would include the hypocritical Mr. Chaffetz, who's obviously made a cold calculation based upon his own personal conclusion that disavowing the GOP nominee, as he did earlier, perhaps does himself more political harm than good.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Lol (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:25:32 PM EST
    The vast majority of mature adult males have long since outgrown that particular phase in their lives.

    That definitely does not include The Donald

    Parent

    I agree with some of that (none / 0) (#12)
    by McBain on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 03:05:51 PM EST
    What I believe startled most people about the "Access Hollywood" video was that the emotionally immature banter they heard wasn't the stuff of teenaged boys and early 20-somethings, but in fact was between two grown men who were then 59 and 34 years old, respectively.

    It was very immature.

    Trump's conveying in explicit detail about how he can impose himself physically upon women by virtue of his status as a celebrity, that "you can do anything to them" including "grab them by the pu$$y," was to many people some rather graphic braggadocio on his part about committing sexual assault.

    Trump seems like the kind of guy who thinks just about every woman is interested in him.

    Parent
    And given the number of women who ... (none / 0) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 06:01:22 PM EST
    ... have since come forward to dispute Trump's assertion that he never engaged in sexual misconduct, a claim made in direct response to Anderson Cooper's pointed question at the beginning of the second presidential debate, it's increasingly probable that Trump likely acted upon that misguided assumption.

    It's quite apparent that this particular issue has struck a very raw nerve with women from across the entire socio-political spectrum, who are sick and tired of being treated by men as though they're second-class citizens and dimwitted playthings to be used and discarded at will. That point that was driven home the other night on Fox News, when Newt Gingrich had a very testy 8-minute exchange with Megyn Kelly, whose own personal disgust with the GOP nominee and his enabling flacks is hardly a secret.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I'm usually more of a Megyn Kelly fan than (none / 0) (#22)
    by McBain on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 06:15:35 PM EST
    a Newt Gingrich fan but I thought Newt did the better job in that exchange.

    As for your other post about Miss Finland...
    Did she come forward before Trump started in presidential campaign?  If not, her accusation doesn't' mean much.

    It's quite apparent that this particular issue has struck a very raw nerve with women from across the entire socio-political spectrum

    I don't think so.  According to CNN last night, Trump is doing better with women in the polls than Romney did in 2012.  Women are tougher than you give them credit for. They're looking at the big picture this election.  

    Parent
    Romney got 44% support from women in 2012. (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 07:20:31 PM EST
    McBain: "According to CNN last night, Trump is doing better with women in the polls than Romney did in 2012."

    Trump is at 41%, and he's clearly dropping. Among all women ages 18-64, who encompass 40% of the U.S. electorate, he's getting thumped badly, 53-38%. Among non-white women, he's being pounded by more than a 5:1 margin, 78-15%.

    Among women who identify themselves as evangelical Christians, Trump enjoys only 58% support, as compared to Romney's 77% in 2012. By contrast, Trump has the support of 70% of men who identify as envangelical Christians, which again is down from Romney's 79% share in 2012.

    But even more disturbing, according to a survey conducted by the Wall Street Journal (which has a paywall, hence no hyperlink provided), while those evangelical women who support Trump appear to be doing so despite the well-documented evidence of his misogyny, most evangelical men who support Trump seem to be attracted to him BECAUSE of it.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    When he was House Speaker in 1998, Newt Gingrich fervently pursued the impeachment of President Bill Clinton for having an extra-marital affair, even though he himself was a married man who had placed his own girlfriend (Calista Bisek) on the House payroll as a staff member of the Committee on Agriculture.

    Gingrich really has no standing to discuss such issues.

    Parent

    wow (none / 0) (#29)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:34:52 PM EST
     
    I'm usually more of a Megyn Kelly fan than a Newt Gingrich fan but I thought Newt did the better job in that exchange.

    There's a shocker.

    As for your other post about Miss Finland...
    Did she come forward before Trump started in presidential campaign?  If not, her accusation doesn't' mean much.

    Really?  Is that so?  According to you???

    Heh.

     

     It's quite apparent that this particular issue has struck a very raw nerve with women from across the entire socio-political spectrum

    I don't think so.  According to CNN last night, Trump is doing better with women in the polls than Romney did in 2012.  Women are tougher than you give them credit for. They're looking at the big picture this election.

    Women are smarter than you give them credit for.  They are looking at the big picture, which is why they're supporting Hillary and why they know to ignore silly, false, link-free claims like yours.

    Parent

    Agreed (none / 0) (#119)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:26:40 PM EST
    he was correct that the news media is hung up on sex,

    As opposed to issues of government corruption

    Parent

    "$ex" - heh (5.00 / 2) (#124)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:41:43 PM EST
    It's amazing how many conservatives are unable to distinguish the difference between "$ex" and "$exual assault".

    I feel like I should help them out by having my 9-year-old explain it to them.

    Parent

    Don't look at me when you say that (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:44:43 PM EST
    he was correct that the news media is hung up on sex,

    As opposed to issues of government corruption

    The GOP has the "news media" beat all hollow when it comes to being hung up on sex, if somebody else is having it.  How many Republicans have been hounded by Democrats about their illicit affairs?  None?  We don't care so much about whom a Republican is boinking as we do the sheer hypocrisy of lecturing the rest of society on morality.

    Remember how the men persecuting Bill Clinton in the '90s were doing EXACTLY the same thing as he was?  Now we have Donald Trump the nominee, with a decades long public history and self confession of sexual assault and adultery.  His inadvertent confession is backed up by a dozen victims.  He is running against a Sunday School teacher.

    Which do the GOP evangelicals support?

    Parent

    Yes, he did (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 03:15:08 PM EST
    There's no "pretending" to be disgusted.   The disgust is genuine.  In fact,  I've never said (or even thought) worse.  His sense of entitlement when it comes to sexual assault - and the pathetic attempts to mansplain them by his defenders - are genuinely disgusting.

    Parent
    Admit it. (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by FlJoe on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 03:36:37 PM EST
    For many Republicans the pig doesn't even have to wear lipstick any more(rhetorically speaking of course).  

    Parent
    It's been a long time (none / 0) (#21)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 06:15:12 PM EST
    but Mike McQueary, former assistant football coach at Penn State during the Sandusky era, has just been awarded a $7.3 million judgement from the court in his defamation case against Penn State University.

    McQueary was the whistleblower. (none / 0) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:19:30 PM EST
    And the top brass at Penn State screwed him over in a vain effort to scapegoat him and protect themselves from the fallout, which rendered him unemployable and ruined his personal reputation. That verdict didn't take very long at all for the jury to decide, given that closing arguments concluded only yesterday. I wish Mr. McQueary all the best as he moves forward with his life.

    Parent
    I never had much sympathy (none / 0) (#31)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:41:00 PM EST
    for him. It was a whistleblowing lawsuit. Not sure I think he deserved that much money for whistle-blowing when he he didn't blow the whistle that hard in the first place.
    Here's an article from back then about his not entirely consistent versions of the shower event.

    Parent
    Including the results of today's verdict (none / 0) (#34)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 10:03:01 PM EST
    payments by Penn State as a result of the Sandusky case has now climbed over $100 million.

    Parent
    It was a defamation suit. (none / 0) (#35)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 10:12:12 PM EST
    Initial public statements made by then-PSU president Graham Spanier in the immediate wake of Sandusky's arrest strongly implied that Mike McQueary was part of the cover-up, when that was quite obviously not the case.

    He was subsequently suspended by Penn State from his position as assistant football coach, which the university claimed at the time was to protect him from death threats -- threats which were apparently never made, since the defense could provide the court and jury with no evidence to that effect.

    After McQueary testified for the prosecution against Jerry Sandusky in the criminal trial, he was fired by Penn State, effectively ruined by Spanier's public statements, and rendered unemployable as a result of the scandal's notoriety.

    IMHO, Mike McQueary deserved every penny he was awarded by the jury, and then some. Now, where does he go to recover his personal reputation? This is exactly why people really don't want to get involved.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The Bundy Brothers (none / 0) (#26)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:19:19 PM EST
    were acquitted Thursday of federal conspiracy and weapons charges.

    You've got to be kidding! (none / 0) (#28)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 09:32:07 PM EST
    Those malevolent clowns seized a federal wildlife refuge without just cause, and further caused several million dollars in damages when they entrenched themselves in place for the extended siege. What happened? Did prosecutors wind up facing a jury full of wingbats? (Yeah, I know the trial was held in liberal Portland, but that city also has its share of R/W crackpots.)

    This verdict can only embolden the far right to engage in similar extremist activities. In the meantime, both Bundy brothers will remain in federal custody, pending the outcome of their criminal case in southern Nevada, where the family has been squatting on public lands for several decades without paying a cent in rent.

    Oy.

    Parent

    It was a federal case, and there is (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 10:18:55 PM EST
    only one federal court district in Oregon. The jury is therefore drawn from the entire state, not just from Portland because the courthouse happens to be located there. I say the defense team is entitled to great credit for winning a very challenging case.

    Parent
    Well, I say that jury was out to sea. (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 11:10:55 PM EST
    While I can understand fully your admiration for the defense counsel's accomplishment from a professional standpoint, as a lay person I find nothing at all positive to be forthcoming from this particular outcome.

    So, what's next? Do we allow right-wing militia nutballs to seize whole sections of Joshua Tree National Park, because they interpret as federal overreach those NPS rules which presently prohibit them from shooting the last remaining wild herds of desert bighorn sheep in Southern California?

    Please don't kid yourself that something like that can't happen, because it has, it can and it will -- if not at Joshua Tree, then at some other federally-controlled locale in the west, like Kaibab National Forest in northern Arizona.

    These crackpots are a menace to both democracy and public safety, plain and simple. If you remember, several hundred of these yahoos defied federal law enforcement officers and BLM officials, who were sited in the wingbats' crosshairs at the standoff over public lands in southern Nevada. I can only hope that the jurors selected for the next Bundy trial in Las Vegas prove themselves to be a lot wiser and farsighted than their myopic counterparts in Portland.

    Federal lands in the public domain belong to ALL of us, not just to those who so happen to reside in their immediate vicinity. The high-stakes game in which the Bundys and their supporters are engaged constitutes theft of public property. This cannot be allowed to stand.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    An acquittal in one case, no matter how (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:25:08 AM EST
    high profile, does not set a precedent. Nor does it authorize those defendants (much less anyone else) to engage in similar conduct. It just means that this jury unanimously agreed that there was at least a reasonable doubt whether the government lawyers proved all the elements of the particular charges against these defendants at this trial. Or  it could mean that this jury -- unanimously -- believed the government had overreached in its handling of these defendants and that the jury therefore chose to "nullify" the strict requirements of the law. Either way, I support the verdict while opposing the politics and tactics of the defendants. I don't know -- nor does any of us, I would venture to say -- what evidence was presented in the courtroom, how credible or reliable it was, what legal rulings the trial judge made, or what arguments the lawyers on either side advanced. None of us is in any position to say the verdict was wrong.

    Parent
    The Bundys were lucky (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 11:43:51 AM EST
    in that Obama permitted cool heads to prevail.  Bill Clinton's Waco carnage didn't get a remake.  The trespassers wore themselves out, dried up.  Their words 'had forked no lightning,' the shallowness of the movement lain bare for all to see.

    Within the administration and agencies, the internal struggles would have been epic.  

    That's a heckuva story.  


    Parent

    I think Donald is right (none / 0) (#52)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 12:17:53 PM EST
    that this verdict will embolden the wackos out there to do more of this stuff. And I think each incident could be more violent than the last.

    Parent
    That's a speech, Donald, (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 10:52:18 AM EST
    not a brief.

    Parent
    That it is, (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 12:04:18 PM EST
    People need to see the forest for the trees, when it comes to the U.S. militia and sovereign citizens movements. There is nothing at all that's noble and / or endearing about these crackpots, who are by and large racist and xenophobic, and literally the far-right lunatic fringe.

    Further and most alarmingly, their numbers have increased dramatically over the last eight years. A good portion of them are emotionally unstable and have a propensity toward violent behavior, and as a whole they are disproportionately well-armed in sharp contrast to the rest of the populace. Right-wing militia types -- not Muslim extremists -- constitute the biggest threat to domestic security in our country.

    In the days following the initial stand-off at the Bundy ranch in southern Nevada, two Bundy allies ruthlessly gunned down two Las Vegas police officers who were on their lunch break in a fast-food restaurant and then shot up a nearby Wal-Mart, killing one more bystander and wounding a number of others before finally being killed themselves by the authorities.

    In recent years, while the U.S, media has bent over backwards to try and connect the Black Lives Matter movement to the tragic deaths of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, they've roundly ignored the fact that since 2009, disaffected elements of the sovereign citizens movement have confronted and ambushed law enforcement officers on numerous occasions, killing 11 and wounding 19 of them.

    These people are bad news. So no, I don't cheer and celebrate their acquittal at trial in Portland. Because in addition to encouraging this manifestly unstable element toward greater uncalculated risks in seeking confrontation with local and federal authorities, discouraged members of law enforcement agencies could correspondingly be much less inclined to seek a peaceful accommodation in any such future standoff. The chances for a real tragedy to occur likely just increased, in my own layman's estimation.

    Dave Neiwert, an investigative journalist who lives in Seattle and is quite knowledgeable about the subject of far-right extremism in the western United States and elsewhere, has been writing extensively about the right-wing militia and "sovereign citizens" movements in his Orcinus.com blog for a number of years. He's worth a read, if you have the time and are interested in learning more.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    less is more (none / 0) (#54)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 12:25:34 PM EST
    And you call someones else (none / 0) (#48)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 11:26:00 AM EST
    a "blowhard?!"

    Parent
    Yet not only do you fail to reciprocate, you seem to delight in making caustic personal remarks to me which are clearly intended to provoke. Now, I don't know WTF your problem is, and frankly I don't care because other than annoying me, your piss-ant attitude is entirely your issue and not mine. But the next time you drop in to address me in a deliberately disrespectful manner, I'll complain directly to the host and let her deal with it.

    Parent
    of everyone else combined in this thread.

    So, yeah, "blowhard" is an interesting word for you to use in reference to someone else...

    Parent

    Then ignore what I write and don't read it. (none / 0) (#169)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 02:00:13 AM EST
    But don't just show up and insult my intellect and writing abilities, just because you have a short attention span, poor reading comprehension and / or trouble with polysyllabic words.

    You're not even engaging or critiquing me with regards to either the content of my post or the subject matter in general. Rather, you sound like some smartassed fifth grader who's trying desperately to fit in and impress his would-be friends, by insulting the nerdy kid with the glasses who actually does his homework. And that's just immature and pathetic, coming from an adult such as yourself.

    Please go someplace else if you don't want to engage in an intelligent discussion. Otherwise, knock it off with the personal insults and conduct yourself with some sense of respect and decorum, as would otherwise be befitting someone your age.

    Ciao.

    Parent

    Such drama. Bravo! (none / 0) (#190)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:10:39 AM EST
    I agree, even at this distance. (none / 0) (#47)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 11:13:03 AM EST
    Occasionally the local U.S. Attorney, Barbara McQuade, speaks publicly about cases in the Eastern District of Michigan.  She's bright and focused.

    Having a USA's official attention leveled in one's direction must feel like being stalked by a T-Rex.

    Parent

    It most definitely (none / 0) (#121)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:30:01 PM EST
    Was a jury of their peers.
    Despite all the evidence to the contrary, the jury must not like the federal command of their local lands.
    I read where 1 defense attorney explained to his client to fully expect to be convicted of something

    Parent
    i dont know (none / 0) (#36)
    by linea on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 10:13:23 PM EST
    they were found innocent of the federal charge of "illegal conspiracy (to hinder) federal BLM agents" (or something like that).

    not everything should result in a federal charge, should it? maybe they are still facing local and state charges?

    Parent

    Because that's federal property, federal authorities have primary jurisdiction over this matter, hence the federal charges and subsequent trial in federal court.

    State and local authorities can act in response to incidents occurring on federal property only when they are invited by their federal counterparts to do so in conjunction with the federal effort, or when the unlawful activities in question spill over into those lands under state and local jurisdiction.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    They are not Free Yet (none / 0) (#44)
    by RickyJim on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:22:57 AM EST
    More than two dozen people, in all, have been criminally charged in the Malheur occupation, and a second group of defendants is due to stand trial in February.

    The Bundy brothers still face assault, conspiracy and other charges stemming from a separate armed standoff in 2014 at the Nevada ranch of their father, Cliven Bundy.

    How soon any of the seven defendants from the trial concluded on Thursday would be released was not immediately clear.

    Link

    Parent
    maybe federal funds (none / 0) (#38)
    by linea on Thu Oct 27, 2016 at 10:48:56 PM EST
    should be given to large cites to help with the homeless problem?

    it's horribly bad. there are tent cities and homeless people camped everywhere.

    i walked just a few blocks to meet a friend for drinks last night and it seemed every unused doorway for every business had people sleaping there. some were addict types but i did see a young couple camped in a doorway. the girl said "hi" to me and i said "hi" back and of course an older homeless man shouted "smile!" at me. i hate that. i dont understand why it's so bad and why nobody does anything about it.

    The vast (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:27:40 AM EST
    majority of them are mentally ill and if we can figure out some kind of way to handle mental illness in this country it will solve a lot of the homeless problem.

    Parent
    i thought this too (smile) (none / 0) (#160)
    by linea on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:05:29 PM EST
    but living here my sense now is that it is many things including drug addiction of course but also i feel there is a despondency from lack of jobs and unaffordable housing. i believe some come here looking for work.

    there are just so many, thousands and thousands.

    Parent

    linea - Are you in Portland? (none / 0) (#168)
    by Cashmere on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 11:17:27 PM EST
    linea - Are you in Portland?  

    Parent
    seattle (none / 0) (#189)
    by linea on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:08:43 AM EST
    Elevating Donald Trump (none / 0) (#40)
    by CityLife on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:02:07 AM EST
    Look what wikileaks revealed about Elevating Donald Trump

    Everything You Wanted to Know About (none / 0) (#55)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 12:32:53 PM EST
    Iceland's Pirate Party - but were Afraid to Ask.

    The Pirate Party formed in 2012, in the wake of the collapse of Iceland's hugely overleveraged banking industry following the 2008 financial crisis. The Party and its motley group of of anarchists, libertarians and internet activists is led by Birgitta Jonsdottir. The 49-year-old former Wikileaks activisits, web programmer and "poetician" has been an MP for different parties since 2009, but decided to help start the party, which part of an international anti-copyright movement that originates in Sweden, because "I'm often crossing paths with nerds as I'm such a nerd myself" she told the Financial Times.

    "poetician"

    Aren't they leading in the polls ... (none / 0) (#58)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 12:45:08 PM EST
    ... for the forthcoming Icelandic parliamentary elections? That ought to be really interesting, if the Pirate Party actually winds up winning and is tasked with the responsibility of governance. I hope they can rise to the occasion.

    Parent
    to me it seems (none / 0) (#158)
    by linea on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:50:10 PM EST
    PP isnt much libertarian and certainly not anarchist.

    Parent
    Election Fraud gets a face, two actually, (none / 0) (#57)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 12:43:02 PM EST
    in Miami-Dade

    A 74-year-old woman tasked with opening envelopes sent by Miami-Dade County voters with their completed mail ballots was arrested Friday after co-workers caught her illegally marking ballots, resulting in an unknown -- but small -- number of fraudulent votes being cast for mayoral candidate Raquel Regalado.



    good god (none / 0) (#60)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:19:37 PM EST
    can the lie stop here, please?

    Twitter is blowing up with the "news" (and actual headlines) that the FBI has reopened its investigation into Hillary Clinton's private e-mail server

    wrong

    James Comey has said that FBI agents working on another investigation told him they discovered some additional Clinton e-mails that may (or may not) be relevant to that investigation (whatever it is), & Comey said the FBI will now (1) determine their relevance to that investigation & (2) determine whether they contain any classified info

    none of this means that the FBI has reopened its investigation into Clinton's private server

    The FBI found a (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:41:53 PM EST
    devise....the emails were not sent to or received from Hillary....

    Very irresponsible act by Comey. 11 days before the election.   Hillary is being treated worse than any other person under investigation.   Comey should never have made any public comments over the Summer when he concluded no criminal prosecution was warranted.

    Parent

    Not Hillary emails (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:45:10 PM EST
    Three emails (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:56:47 PM EST
    This is the basis of letter.

    Unbelievable.

    Parent

    None of the three (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:09:24 PM EST
    emails were withheld by Hillary.

    Parent
    Comey should resign (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:12:43 PM EST
    His actually should be impeached.

    Parent
    Meant to say (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:13:14 PM EST
    his "arse" should be impeached.

    Parent
    Comey should (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:23:15 PM EST
    come out immediately and grovel and explain this or resign his position. Obama should jerk him up by the short hairs and push him out in front of the press to explain and make Comey swallow hard.

    Parent
    Impeach him. (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:27:41 PM EST
    Dems can push Articles of Impeachment.

    Parent
    Comey and the FBI are in a terrible position here, one in which they would be accused of playing politics whatever they ended up doing. . . .

    Reasonable minds will differ about whether Comey leaned too far foreward [sic] in publicly disclosing information about his thinking on the email case. . . .

    But what you can't reasonably say here is that Comey has been anyone's political lackey. Over the howling objections of many Republicans, he ended the Clinton email investigation, concluding that "no reasonable prosecutor" would go forward with a case. Over the snarls of the Clinton forces, at the same time, he commented quite disparagingly about the behavior of the woman who is likely to become his boss. . . .

    Wittes also offers this invitation:

    If you're inclined to be angry with Comey over this, imagine that he had not said something and it emerged after the election that, having testified that the investigation was complete, he authorized additional investigation of a new trove of emails.


    Parent
    Wrong (5.00 / 5) (#92)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:33:53 PM EST
    Comey violated long standing policy by going public last Summer.  His public rebuke of Hillary, after concluding no crime had been committed, was heavy handed and wrong.

    Now, to go public with just amorphous comments without context or detail is the height of irresponsibility.  He should have said nothing.  Investigate--do no insert yourself into the election.

    Comey has obligation to clear this up--NOW.  Not leaving it hanging.  He needs to state it has nothing to do with Hillary or her server.

    No excuse for Comey.  
     

    Parent

    Exactly (none / 0) (#122)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:35:38 PM EST
    A rock and a hard place.

    Parent
    Armando twitter (none / 0) (#64)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:58:08 PM EST
    Current info there.

    Parent
    Emails not from Hillary private server (none / 0) (#65)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 01:59:17 PM EST
    MKS, is it known where the emails (none / 0) (#133)
    by Green26 on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:12:15 PM EST
    originally came from? I know where they were found, but is it known whether Huma may have sent them from her Clinton email address to her personal email address? I don't know, just asking.

    If there are only 3 or even if there are more, why doesn't Huma release them? Would she have some legal restriction from releasing them? I see the Clinton team are calling for their release.

    Parent

    Preusmably (5.00 / 2) (#155)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:22:24 PM EST
    Huma no longer has her laptop, or I heard one person say it is cell phone.

    I have heard three emails and thousands of emails.   Depending on what one is talking about I assume.

    Comey knows.  And Chaffetz says he will not call Comey to testify publicly about this.   Sure looks like Chaffetz does not want the facts out there.

    Parent

    Apparently the guess (5.00 / 2) (#157)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:48:44 PM EST
    is around 1,000 emails that she had on his or used on his laptop. She had a number of email accounts. She can't release them because the laptop is in the possession of the FBI.

    Hillary is asking Comey to come clean. We'll see if he does or not. He knows what he did was wrong as stated in his email to his employees. He's really trashed the FBI and certainly needs to go. I'm sure Obama wouldn't do anything before the election but I expect either Obama or Hillary to get rid of him after the election.

    Parent

    Not possible (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:09:05 PM EST
    to just fire him like a Cabinet Secretary.  10  year term that expires in 2023.

    Ego.  Power gone to his head.  He is ignoring longstanding DOJ policy to comment publicly and to do so very close to an election.

    Ego out of control is the benign explanation.  Caving to Trump and Right Wingers who want to "lock her up" is another possibility.  

    Parent

    I know they (5.00 / 4) (#165)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:25:59 PM EST
    can't fire him but I'm sure they could probably force his resignation. Hillary could make his life utter hell by frankly having him investigated. We've seen two prominent examples this year alone that could be reason for investigation and this last one he could be investigated for violating the Hatch Act. The country has lost confidence in the FBI under his tenure. He's shown himself to not be a law officer but a hack.

    Parent
    That will be hard to do (1.00 / 1) (#170)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 04:16:54 AM EST
    Considering that if elected, she might still be under FBI investigation

    Parent
    Oh, good lord (5.00 / 3) (#173)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 06:06:48 AM EST
    She's not under FBI investigation now. However I know the desperate GOP sees their entire party circling the drain and is throwing whatever they can out there in an attempt to help themselves. Comey is going to have a mutiny in the FBI and it's already brewing. FBI agents are furious with the way he's trashed the agency's reputation to the general public and you know what? They're right. Who on earth would have any dealings with the FBI after this kind of thing? The FBI looks inept and dishonest.

    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#174)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 07:02:51 AM EST
    she was never the target of this investigation. The FBI was investigating the possible mishandling of classified information by the entire State Department.

    Parent
    He could be a tough nut to (none / 0) (#167)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 10:06:21 PM EST
    crack.

    He is off on his own.  FBI and DOJ rank and file supposedly upset with Comey over this.  He doesn't seem to care that much.

    A self righteousness zealot convinced of his own infallibility is a dangerous person indeed.

    Parent

    The FBI (none / 0) (#178)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 08:57:18 AM EST
    Is upset with Comey for not recommending prosecution.
    The Justice Department is upset with Comey for this latest announcement. Both are upset, but for 2 different reasons.
    The Justice Department put the kibosh on the FBI investigation from the get go. The FBI's greatest tool, a grand jury ( to issue subpoenas) was denied them buy Justice.
    The senior FBI agent in charge of the e mail investigation retired in the middle of the investigation. Odd, why? Because as he said, this investigation is going sideways. FBI speak, it was never meant to go anywhere to begin with.

    Six months later, the senior FBI agent in charge of that investigation resigned from the case and retired from the FBI because he felt the case was going "sideways"; that's law enforcement jargon for "nowhere by design." John Giacalone had been the chief of the New York City, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., field offices of the FBI and, at the time of his "sideways" comment, was the chief of the FBI National Security Branch.

    The reason for the "sideways" comment must have been Giacalone's realization that DOJ and FBI senior management had decided that the investigation would not work in tandem with a federal grand jury. That is nearly fatal to any government criminal case. In criminal cases, the FBI and the DOJ cannot issue subpoenas for testimony or for tangible things; only grand juries can.

    Giacalone knew that without a grand jury, the FBI would be toothless, as it would have no subpoena power. He also knew that without a grand jury, the FBI would have a hard time persuading any federal judge to issue search warrants. A judge would perceive the need for search warrants to be not acute in such a case because to a judge, the absence of a grand jury can only mean a case is "sideways" and not a serious investigation.

    http://tinyurl.com/hg86er3

    http://tinyurl.com/jlxbra3

    Parent

    You know what would be refreshing? (none / 0) (#183)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 09:51:57 AM EST
    Actual evidence to back up these tinfoil conspiracy theories, as opposed to opinion pieces from wingnut blogs and right wing judges.

    Oh, and links that aren't from "tinyurl", so we will know the source before clicking on them and save some time.

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#186)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 10:50:43 AM EST
    One is the actual letter sent to Comey from a recently retired FBI Agent,
    And please elaborate on what was misconstrued in the other article?
    The biggest piece of the puzzle, impaneling a grand jury, was not done by the Justice Department, hamstringing the investigation.
    Threw the investigation in a boat, without a paddle.

    Parent
    Actually, ... (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:25:58 AM EST
    ... one is the the silly opinion of a single, retired, winger FBI Agent posted on a wingnut blog (American Thinker).  The Justice Department decided no action was needed when the investigative team of the FBI unanimously concluded no charges should be brought and Comey himself noted no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges.

    The fact that you and some fellow conservatives (FBI Agent or not) want to push baseless conspiracy theories and think you're better able to interpret the law is just funny.

    Parent

    to "not" comment publicly.... (none / 0) (#162)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 09:09:28 PM EST
    Emails not (none / 0) (#66)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:00:02 PM EST
    held by someone under prior Hillary investigation.

    Parent
    Huma Abedin's emails (none / 0) (#70)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:20:25 PM EST
    Not on Hillary server, so must be Huma's .gov address.

    Parent
    Weiner s*xting scandal (none / 0) (#71)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:21:42 PM EST
    led to the discovery of these three emails.

    NOT HILLARY EMAILS.  NOT ON HER SERVER.

    Parent

    Yep devices belonged to Huma and Weiner (none / 0) (#76)
    by leftwig on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:39:20 PM EST
    The only thing we know is that Comey has said that whatever was discovered on the device(s) appears to be pertinent to the Clinton email investigation so he amended his statement on that investigation being closed.

    Parent
    There is more reporting (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:46:12 PM EST
    on this.

    AP and NY Times have more details.

    Outrageous interference in an election.

    Comey appears to have been intimidated by Trump.   This shows that Trump should never be near the levers of power.

    Comey needs to go.

    Parent

    AYFKM? (none / 0) (#91)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:33:23 PM EST
    Comey appears to have been intimidated by Trump.


    Parent
    Actually Comey (5.00 / 3) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:50:50 PM EST
    has no idea if it's pertinent or not. He really doesn't know anything other than there's some emails. They need a court order to get her emails and the court may not even grant them access simply because she's not the one that's being investigated. Her husband is.

    Parent
    NY Times: not 3 e-mails (none / 0) (#81)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:06:32 PM EST
    Federal law enforcement officials said Friday that the new emails uncovered in the closed investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server were discovered after the F.B.I. seized electronic devices belonging to Huma Abedin, a top aide to Mrs. Clinton, and her husband, Anthony Weiner.

    The F.B.I. is investigating illicit text messages that Mr. Weiner sent to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina. The bureau told Congress on Friday that it had uncovered new emails related to the Clinton case -- one federal official said they numbered in the thousands.

    does that explain why Comey could not say how long it would take to determine the particulars?

    with respect to Hillary Clinton, though, why should it have mattered whether these newly discovered e-mails contained classified information? Comey already said in July that classified info had turned up on her private server, & he recommended no charges

    is Huma Abedin in the crosshairs now?

    Parent

    Other sources say (none / 0) (#86)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:25:35 PM EST
    just three emails.

    Parent
    Maybe there are (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:30:46 PM EST
    thousands of emails between Huma and Anthony and only three are even marginally related to Clinton. All in all the thing seems to be stupid. It's not her server and none of the emails were from her.

    Parent
    Comey said (none / 0) (#95)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:51:53 PM EST
    that he doesn't know how long it will take to determine what's in the e-mails

    if there actually are thousands, as the NY Times cites a "federal official" as having said, then it would be impossible to know right now whether there are only 3, or any at all, related to Hillary

    Parent

    He needs to come (5.00 / 4) (#112)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:57:00 PM EST
    out and explain himself. He needs to state that it is not related to Hillary. As I understand it Huma used Anthony's computer and she forwarded emails to several different email accounts, Clinton mail being one of them. It's likely that since Hillary turned her server into them that they already have all the emails she forwarded. Thousands could be in the other accounts and 3 could be that she forwarded to Hillary. But again, Comey is going to have to come out and explain himself. If he's mad at anyone it should be Chaffetz.

    Parent
    Not involving (none / 0) (#99)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:59:06 PM EST
    Hillary's server means not an issue about her.

    But swing away.

    Parent

    agree (none / 0) (#101)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:09:37 PM EST
    so please show me where in my comment to Ga6th i said it is an issue about Hillary

    your comment makes me think that you didn't even bother to read Comey's letter

    but then why would you have to, when you can just parrot Armando

    Parent

    I don't parrot Armando (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:21:57 PM EST
    I read the sources he cites.  He is faster and more reliable than you.  You "parrot" basic stuff.  I look for more detail, and more up-to-date info.

    You are now just hurling insults.

    If it is not about Hillary, that is a big thing, no?  The main thing, right?


    Parent

    which ones? (none / 0) (#89)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:30:32 PM EST
    the NY Times has not amended its reporting

    Parent
    Read Armando (none / 0) (#93)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:35:37 PM EST
    right now Armando is losing his sh*t (none / 0) (#94)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:49:21 PM EST
    so i am not going to slog through his entire uproarious Twitter feed

    somehow i doubt that Armando has sources unavailable to the NY Times & its reporters on what is obviously a major breaking story

    but you could enlighten me with a link

    Parent

    Kurt Eichnewald (none / 0) (#98)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:58:01 PM EST
    Armando knows his sh*t.

    But you are biased, so I will not bend over backwards to do the search you can do yourself.

    Parent

    biased how, FFS? (none / 0) (#100)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:05:49 PM EST
    i launched this stream of comments by saying that the press has been falsely reporting the story

    maybe you're the one who should do some more searching

    Parent

    You shade it (none / 0) (#102)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:19:20 PM EST
    against Hillary.

    I have done plenty of searching.

    Parent

    welll, that would come as a big surprise (none / 0) (#106)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:31:06 PM EST
    to the friends & neighbors in Oakland with whom i've been phone banking for Hillary by calling voters in the swing states

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#107)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:33:53 PM EST
    But your insults suggest more than just a pro-Hillary person commenting on the news.

    Parent
    a pro-Hillary voter (none / 0) (#108)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:41:00 PM EST
    commenting on flawed &/or outright deceptive Tweets, headlines, & news reports, & starting this series of comments by saying so, but maybe you didn't notice that

    Parent
    Sure, but then (none / 0) (#109)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:45:23 PM EST
    you still level criticism.

    Look nothing to be gained in this conversation.  If you have new information about this newest letter, I am all ears.  But not the other.

    My attempt to bring information here just brought an insult from you about parroting. Awesome choice.  

    Parent

    Eichenwald (none / 0) (#125)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:42:18 PM EST
    Direct quotes from Comey (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by leftwig on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:30:57 PM EST
    This one isn't entirely direct, but clearly indicates he has amended his statement that the Clinton email investigation is closed.  Would you supplement a statement that the investigation was closed by saying the investigation remains closed, or that there is a change in status?  

    "In previous congressional testimony, I referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server. Due to recent developments, I am writing to supplement my previous testimony"

    This new information is being looked at in line with the material from the previously closed investigation.  What that information contains or its relevance is unknown, but it does appear the FBI has done some analysis on the content.  Comey only stated that:

    "the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation"

    This may end up being nothing or it may end up being something.  Right now, no one knows other than it was significant enough for the FBI director [appointed by Obama] to make a public statement on the matter.

    Parent

    The irony (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:06:59 PM EST
    is that Comey has publicly said the FBI doesn't comment on ongoing investigations. He has stated that in regards to Trump and Putin. I'm beginning to think that Comey has ties to Putin too. He sure acts like he does.

    Parent
    that didn't take long (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:10:21 PM EST
    "Significant enough" - heh (none / 0) (#75)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:39:14 PM EST
    This may end up being nothing or it may end up being something.  Right now, no one knows other than it was significant enough for the FBI director [appointed by Obama] to make a public statement on the matter.

    Right now,  no one knows anything other than it was significant enough for the FBI Director (Republican) to issue a letter 11 days before the election.

    Parent

    Actually, an ex-Pub (none / 0) (#77)
    by leftwig on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:44:08 PM EST
    according to Congressional testimony.

    Parent
    Actually, only not REGISTERED as a ... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 02:56:25 PM EST
    ... Republican a few months ago.   He didn't testify as to whether he still identified as a Republican after being a lifelong registered Republican and Republican donor.

    Parent
    The question and quote (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by leftwig on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:17:15 PM EST
    Virginia Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly said, "Although our politics are different--I gather you're a Republican--is that correct?"

    "I have been a registered Republican for most of my adult life, not registered any longer," Comey said.

    No question he previously donated to and supported GOP candidates.  No question that he is no longer officially affiliated with the Pub party (no comment as to which party if any he is registered to currently, only that its not the Republican party).  No question he was picked to lead the FBI by a lifelong Dem.

    Parent

    Yep, precisely what I said (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:24:35 PM EST
    A lifelong Republican who recently decided he wouldn't register as a Republican, which does not mean he's no longer a Republican.  

    But it's nice you feel the fact he was appointed by a Democrat is important.

    Parent

    Yes, it may end up (none / 0) (#80)
    by KeysDan on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:04:47 PM EST
    being nothing or it may end up being something.  And, if something, it could be anything pertinent or nothing pertinent.

    While Comey was cryptic, surely great efforts went into the wording.  Comey says the FBI will "take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.  ..although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, I cannot predict how long it will take to complete this additional work."

    These new investigative steps to allow investigators to investigate these emails are to "supplement" or serve as an addition to Comey's previous testimony that the FBI had completed its investigation of Clinton emails. Supplement or add to, not subtract from or alter, modify, or change.

    It seems as if Comey may have some internal problems as well as concern for Republican criticisms that he knew of something or nothing prior to the election but said nothing.  So, he decided to say something, albeit reckless and irresponsible.  

     Like a stink bomb, this will get attention, but little damage will be done.  After a while, the story will be analyzed and put into perspective.  Of course, like all bombs, this stinker will take some toll.  

    Yes, Comey was (5.00 / 5) (#87)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:27:12 PM EST
    intimidated by Trump.  Bowed to right wing pressure.  Investigations are not conducted in public--except as to Hillary.

    Comey must go.

    Parent

    And, the media, (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by KeysDan on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:57:12 PM EST
    once again, got played by Chaffetz. May explain why Chaffetz threw his teenage daughter under the bus, and said he will now, re-endorse by way of public announcement that he will now vote for Trump, despite all those moral qualms of three weeks ago.

    Taking a page from Trump to apply to this issue, "I am calling for total and complete ban on media reporting until they can figure out what the hell is going on."  

    As for Comey, although he has time remaining on his ten-year appointment, he surely knows that he could not continue during a Clinton Administration, having investigated Secretary Clinton for over a year, and finding no prosecutable wrongdoings. Never-the-less, offering up a press conference that added gratuitous characterizations.

    Parent

    Yeah, I'm guessing (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:52:36 PM EST
    he knows he's a goner if Hillary takes the presidency.

    Parent
    also if she is not elected (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:03:02 PM EST
    because why would a president-elect whose voters chant Lock her up choose to retain Comey, who made a very public point of saying that there was no reason to lock her up?

    Parent
    They would not (5.00 / 3) (#136)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:22:26 PM EST
    care about Comey if they won. They see him as impeding their ability to win since they don't believe they actually can win an election based on facts. He would have to relinquish his role simply due to the fact of what he has said and done to Hillary. There's no way he could work under her and he knows it. Too bad he's willing to sell the country out to the most unstable candidate in the history of the country to save his own job.

    Anyway the FBI is leaking all over the place to the press saying that none of those emails would have changed one thing. Which makes sense because this is all about Weiner.

    Parent

    "Choose to retain" (none / 0) (#120)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:29:31 PM EST
    Ah, no, the Ghost of J. Edgar leaves us with ten year terms for FBI director.  

    You can't get rid of an FBI Director.  Mebbe pressure will get him to resign....But he is automatically there for 10 years.


    Parent

    thanks for the correction (none / 0) (#127)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:43:29 PM EST
    it seems, then, that we can expect Comey to resign no matter who wins

    unless it's Evan McMuffin

    Parent

    2023 (none / 0) (#141)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:33:49 PM EST
    That's when his term expires....

    Parent
    well, you've convinced me (1.00 / 2) (#96)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:56:33 PM EST
    it all makes sense now

    the Russians crawled out from under Trump's bed & took up residence under Comey's while Anthony Weiner was s*exting with the two of them

    good analysis

    Parent

    Can the insults, (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:23:44 PM EST
    You are not adding to the conversation.

    Parent
    from your perspective, no (none / 0) (#110)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 04:48:28 PM EST
    but i do routinely mock conspiratorial ideas, so don't take it personally

    by the way, i recognize the cry of Comey must go! from the first 400 feet or so of Armando's current Twitter feed, which i did consult early on but left when it devolved into a nest of angry parrots

    Parent

    What?!? (none / 0) (#114)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:05:50 PM EST
    the Russians crawled out from under Trump's bed & took up residence under Comey's while Anthony Weiner was s*exting with the two of them

    good analysis

    Where did MKS say anything about the Russians?

    Parent

    nowhere (none / 0) (#115)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:11:45 PM EST
    it was a nonsense reply to a nonsense comment

    Parent
    Ahhhhh ... (none / 0) (#116)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:17:26 PM EST
    ... so the "brilliant analysis" you were mocking was your strawman analysis.

    Got it.

    Parent

    indeed (none / 0) (#118)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:26:20 PM EST
    as silly as the brilliant analysis that Comey has been "intimidated by" Trump, who faces defeat in a matter of days

    Parent
    Don't belittle your analysis (none / 0) (#123)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:38:49 PM EST
    Your strawman, CT was much more "brilliant" than the speculation that Comey did this because of the barrage of criticism he's faced from Trump and Republicans for the past several months.  An entirely separate league of "brilliant".

    Parent
    thanks, but i rather prefer (none / 0) (#129)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:49:04 PM EST
    your own brilliance as a sleuth of whether & when Jim Comey was OMG a registered Republican!!!

    Parent
    I guess it's just my personal ... (none / 0) (#131)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:52:15 PM EST
    ... preference for facts and evidence over tinfoil, strawman CTs.

    You should try it sometime.

    Parent

    That (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:42:34 PM EST
    It seems as if Comey may have some internal problems

    Would be a understatement

    Parent

    I'll have to disagree, in part, because ... (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:49:46 PM EST
    ... we're in no position yet to properly ascertain the potential effect that today's developments might have on the presidential race.

    In an act almost wholly without precedent, FBI Director James Comey has dropped a vaguely worded, politically volatile and essentially context-free memo on Congressional leaders in the waning days of a bitterly divisive presidential campaign, which that he surely must should have known and realized would be deliberately misinterpreted and released by at least one of the GOP leaders. (Here's to you, Rep. Chaffetz.)

    As Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, noted in a public statement released by her office earlier today, which I'm including in full here because I believe it to be important:

    "I was shocked to read Director Comey's letter in which he indicated `the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.'

    "This is particularly troubling since so many questions are unanswered. It's unclear whether these emails have already been reviewed or if Secretary Clinton sent or received them. In fact, we don't even know if the FBI has these emails in its possession.

    "Without knowing how many emails are involved, who wrote them, when they were written or their subject matter, it's impossible to make any informed judgment on this development. However, one thing is clear: Director Comey's announcement played right into the political campaign of Donald Trump, who is already using the letter for political purposes. And all of this just 11 days before the election.

    "Director Comey admits `the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant.' He cannot predict how long the investigation will take. And we don't know if the FBI has these emails in hand. It's too bad Director Comey didn't take those gaping holes into consideration when he decided to send this letter. The FBI has a history of extreme caution near Election Day so as not to influence the results. Today's break from that tradition is appalling." (Emphasis is mine.)

    Only now, several hours ex post facto, it's gradually coming to light that: (1) There were perhaps only three emails in question; (2) These emails were neither found on the Clintons' server nor were they sent to or by the Secretary of State; and (3) They were discovered during an entirely unrelated FBI investigation to determine whether or not former Congressman Anthony Weiner was sexting with a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina.

    In the meantime, Mrs. Clinton's reputation has suffered yet another wholly undeserved and innuendo-laden broadside. Because as I write this, there are still headlines posted out there on the internet implying that this is somehow related to the recently-concluded investigation into her use of a private email and server while at the State Dept. That doesn't appear to be the case.

    But most importantly, why didn't Comey disclose any of these aforementioned details in today's memo to congressional leaders? If he didn't anticipate that his cryptic wording would result in a media firestorm, then he's phuquing incompetent. And if he did, then he's guilty of an appalling breach of agency protocol, for which any one of his subordinates would no doubt have been called to account and fired, had they committed it.

    Moreover, this isn't the first time that Comey's stepped in it, since today's circus comes only several months after he offered appallingly inappropriate personal commentary during his press conference about Sec. Clinton's email practices, opinions which were not supported by his agency's own report, and which further and wrongly implied that the Clinton's server was probably hacked by malevolent outside sources, despite any and all evidence to the contrary.

    If Pete Williams' stellar reporting today is right, and the initial media reports end up being entirely much ado about nothing, then James Comey likely did his country an enormous and incalculable disservice today -- first by issuing an irresponsibly context-free memo that he should have known would be quickly released by Republicans, and then by declining personally to go on the record to clarify that memo's contents with that necessary context.

    Instead, Comey left it up to FBI staff to try and clean up his mess on background with reporters such as Mr. Williams -- who should be commended for the outstanding job he did today in a valiant effort to diffuse another manufactured Clinton pseudoscandal, before it could gain any further traction in the public's collective consciousness.

    Still, as Paul Krugman rightly noted earlier this afternoon, this (likely) non-story nevertheless held enormous potential to have a huge and adverse impact upon the Democratic nominee's campaign, "because the bed has been fouled, and can't be un-fouled."

    By allowing Hillary Clinton to be unjustly maligned and impugned today, James Comey has sheared the bolts of his own professional integrity and has compromised the agency he leads. He ought to resign. And if he doesn't volunteer it, then President Obama and Attorney Gen. Loretta Lynch ought to request it, and leave it up to the next president to nominate his successor.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    FWIW (none / 0) (#132)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:09:17 PM EST
    NY Times has now updated its reporting & quotes a "federal official" as saying that the e-mails in question number not just "in the thousands" but "in the tens of thousands"

    which of course has no bearing on the rest of your comment, Donald, nor does it mean that the FBI has "reopened" its investigation into Hillary Clinton's private e-mail server

    Parent

    Huma could (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:16:25 PM EST
    have sent thousands of emails on that laptop. Still has nothing to do with Hillary. Any that Hillary had received from Huma would already be on Hillary's server.

    This is really more about demoralized Republicans and attempting to keep the house which they see going away.

    Parent

    Thank you for the update, Addams. (5.00 / 5) (#138)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:24:27 PM EST
    And per NBC's Pete Williams, it further turns out that the FBI apparently  needs a court order to peruse the emails! And so, it's becoming readily apparent that James Comey has absolutely no idea what's in those messages between Ms. Abedin and Mrs. Clinton, or whether or not those emails are already in investigators' inventories gleaned from the Clintons' server.

    I'm now even more firmly convinced that Comey needs to resign.

    Parent

    He lied (5.00 / 3) (#139)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:29:47 PM EST
    on top of all that. Wow.

    Parent
    I'm not sure what Comey was thinking. (none / 0) (#144)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:54:53 PM EST
    But looking at it from the outside, it sure appears as though he's made a conscious effort to influence the 2016 election on behalf of Republicans by further inflaming public opinion, at least as far as down-ballot races may be concerned. (It's likely too late to save Trump.)

    Either that, or he's got to be one of the most ethically obtuse and hapless FBI directors we've had since L. Patrick Gray first succeeded the late J. Edgar Hoover in 1972, and subsequently allowed himself to be first used by the Nixon administration and then swept away in the Watergate scandal.

    Either way, he clearly compromised himself.

    Parent

    ... Director Comey's office never notified her of the letter that was sent to congressional leaders, and that she first learned about it today from news reports in the media. (Blindsiding the Democratic presidential nominee is another breach of protocol, if anyone is keeping score.)

    She is now calling Comey to account, and demanding that the FBI release any and all information it has on the investigation, telling reporters at a press conference tonight that "it's now imperative that the bureau explain this issue in question, whatever it is, and without further delay."

    Meanwhile, across the street from the FBI Building in Washington, D.C.:

    "Justice Department officials were said to be very upset with Mr. Comey's decision to go to Congress with the new information before it had been adequately investigated.

    "That decision, said several officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, appeared to contradict longstanding Justice Department guidelines discouraging any actions close to an election that could influence the outcome.

    "One official complained that no one at the FBI or Justice Department is even certain yet whether any of the emails included national security material or was even relevant to the investigation into whether Mrs. Clinton had mishandled classified material in her use of a private email server."

    So, those of us here at TL today who've been questioning Director Comey's motives and timing in sending that letter / memo aren't the only ones who are doing so. Regardless of whether or not he thinks his intentions were honorable, the cavalier manner in which he first shaded the truth about the FBI's findings last July, and the tone-deaf ineptitude his office has shown with today's mess, has been nothing short of appalling and horrible. The man's conduct is unacceptable, and he's undermined his own position as head of the FBI as a result.

    Comey needs to go.

    Parent

    ... is now calling for James Comey to resign as FBI director:

    "Donald Trump's oft-repeated claim that the FBI's investigation of 'Crooked Hillary and the presidential election itself were and are 'rigged,' seems to have thrown FBI Director James Comey into a state of panic. In foolishly making a public announcement that the bureau is reviewing newly discovered emails related to Hillary Clinton's personal server, he has inserted himself yet again into the presidential campaign.

    "The FBI virtually never announces the commencement or termination of ongoing criminal investigations or the discovery of new evidence. Such inquiries are often conducted in relative secrecy, enabling a more efficient investigation.

    "It is not unusual for investigations in so-called 'white collar' cases to go on for years, luring the target into an unfounded belief that he or she is in the clear. Then the hammer falls. A grand jury indictment is announced by the Department of Justice and the handcuffs are swiftly employed.

    "The old, sensible FBI rule book apparently has been thrown on the trash heap this year. While undoubtedly attempting to be open and 'transparent,' to protect the reputation of the FBI, the FBI director has tossed a Molotov cocktail into the presidential race.

    [...]

    "In truth, investigations open and close routinely and secretly when new evidence comes to light. Each new scrap in a pile of useful or useless evidence is not announced in real time, like a scandal in a scripted reality TV Show. Perhaps it's time for the embattled FBI director who seems to have forgotten how to conduct a proper investigation to resign."

    Ian Millhiser at Think Progress notes the very real possibility that the emails in question are duplicates of emails which the FBI already has in its possession:

    "These new revelations -- that the FBI knows little, if anything, about the emails at the heart of the political bomb Comey dropped less than two weeks before an election -- come after earlier reporting revealed that the emails are 'not to or from Clinton.'

    "So, to be clear, the FBI Director delivered a gut punch to the Clinton campaign, despite the fact that 1) he doesn't know what he has; 2) it may be something that he already had; and, 3) whatever it is that he has, it reportedly didn't come from Secretary Clinton, and was not sent to her."

    What Democrats are now feeling about Director Comey's sucker punch of the Clinton campaign is fury, not panic. Panic paralyzes. Fury mobilizes.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    UPDATE No. 2: Comey's out of line. (5.00 / 4) (#202)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 12:35:38 PM EST
    "Director Comey acted totally inappropriately. He had no business writing to Congress about supposed new emails that neither he nor anyone in the FBI has ever reviewed. It is not the function of the FBI director to be making public pronouncements about an investigation, never mind about an investigation based on evidence that he acknowledges may not be significant. The job of the FBI is simply to investigate and to provide the results of its investigation to the prosecutorial arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. His job is not to give a running commentary about any investigation or his opinion about any investigation. This is particularly egregious since Secretary Clinton has no way to respond to what amounts to nebulous and speculative innuendo." (Emphasis is mine.)
    - Nick Ackerman, former Asst. U.S. Atty (NY), Politico, "Comey's Disclosure Shocks Former Prosecutors" (Otober 29, 2016)

    By willfully ignoring longstanding USDOJ protocols on multiple occasions, and unnecessarily inserting himself into the middle of a contentious election campaign, FBI Director James Comey has disgraced his office and further, has likely compromised the integrity of his own agency with regard to its current investigation.

    It's time for him to go. He needs to resign.

    Parent

    truth (none / 0) (#84)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 03:13:10 PM EST
    Like a stink bomb, this will get attention, but little damage will be done.

    especially since early voting has already started

    Parent

    which is a very good reason (none / 0) (#128)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 05:44:15 PM EST
    To curtail early voting.

    To maybe start the weekend prior to election day

    Parent

    Do you really (5.00 / 4) (#135)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:18:32 PM EST
    think this is going to get people to vote for the most unqualified most unstable candidate in the history of the country? People who vote early mostly are ones that would not change their votes. Sorry that Republicans are not showing up to vote. No, not sorry actually I'm glad.

    And there are more at least two GOP operatives say massively big hits coming at Republicans. So curtailing early voting is probably going to make no difference.

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#140)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:31:55 PM EST
    Just might grab a couple more votes for McMullin!!

    Parent
    I hear that you can grab ... (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 08:02:59 PM EST
    ... an Egg McMuffin with hash browns and a cup of coffee at McDonald's for only $4.99.

    Oh, excuse me, you're talking about another one of your favorite Specials of the Month, Evan McMullin. My bad. I always seem to get the two confused. Maybe that's because both specials are equally bland, and consist of little or no real substance.

    :-P

    Parent

    Homer Simpson agrees with you (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 08:44:33 AM EST
    1996, "The Simpsons" did a "Treehouse of Horror" episode featuring Bill Clinton running against Bob Dole. Halfway through the episode, during a presidential debate, Homer Simpson reveals that both candidates are "hideous space reptiles," complete with dripping fangs, tentacles and one eye each: Kodos and Kang. The crowd screams in shock and horror. Then one of the aliens, Kodos, speaks: "It's true; we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system. You have to vote for one of us." The crowd mutters in stunned agreement. One fellow speaks up: "Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate!" "Go ahead," says Kang, "throw your vote away." Both aliens laugh hysterically as the crowd frets.

    Welcome to election 2016.

    http://tinyurl.com/hllcryo

    Parent

    Probably not surprising (none / 0) (#188)
    by McBain on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:07:04 AM EST
    I'm a big Simpson's fan.... specifically the Phil Hartman years.

    Parent
    McMullin is a joke. (none / 0) (#145)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 06:55:25 PM EST
    He's running for President of Utah.

    Parent
    Well (2.00 / 1) (#146)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:01:46 PM EST
    I find him best qualified out of everyone running.

    Parent
    That's great (none / 0) (#148)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:10:58 PM EST
    Ihave an uncle who thinks Joe Exotic is the best qualified of all the candidates,  so you're in the same boat.   Now all you need is for Utah to secede.

    Parent
    He's almost as (none / 0) (#149)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 28, 2016 at 07:13:55 PM EST
    unqualified as Trump. He's never held elective office before.

    Parent
    i dont know (none / 0) (#200)
    by linea on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 11:46:32 AM EST
    why people would argue with Trevor who, as a republican, is more comfortable voting for a moderate republican than trump.

    mcmullin seems pretty generic republican to me; pro border security but mass deportations impractical, pro-gun of course, strongly anti-abortion, opposes legalizing marijuana, wants to expand the military, pro free-trade globalism, lower corporate tax and lower tax on small businesses, eliminate regulations on businesses, accepts gay marriage but religious people should be able to refuse service, repeal obamacare, wants to make medicare "sustainable by creating a premium support system" (i have no idea what that means).

    Parent

    Must qualify (none / 0) (#204)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 29, 2016 at 04:25:27 PM EST
    why people would argue with Trevor who, as a republican, is more comfortable voting for a moderate republican than trump.

    I have been Conservative, but as I age , and watch the inherent corruption that manifests from both political parties, most likely propagated by the very nature of their organizations, have mellowed towards a much more Libertarian stance, while still maintaining a foot in the Conservative camp. (Fiscally conservative)

    Having worked in government for many years, I have seen close up the corruption , again , by both parties.

    A pox on both their houses