home

Monday Night (July 4th) Open Thread

Another 4th of July weekend comes to a close. Fireworks here are about to begin (it's not quite dark at 8:00 pm.)

Some thoughts on freedom:

For me, I keep seeing our freedom slip away. As in 2011, the holiday rings a little hollow to me this year.

In TV news, a new female character is introduced tonight on Senor de los Cielos (which has only two weeks left.) She is Emiliana Contreras, the daughter of one of Aurelio's rivals, Lencho Contreras, one of the "old guard" narcos who ended up in prison supposedly because of Aurelio. Her role is to get Aurelio to fall in love with her and then take him down. [More...]

I don't remember a "Lencho" from past seasons so I don't know anything about him. Or what Emiliana's arrival means for Esperanza, his Venezuelan money laundering current girlfriend. She must either end up with the just resigned Venezuelan ambassador to Mexico, or she's killed.

There are reports in Panama that an episode of Season 5 is now being filmed there. Season 5 will supposedly be about Aurelio's family having to choose between him and Victor, the son of his deceased brother Chacorta.

And in the real news department, there are reports this weekend that Kate del Castillo is now dating actor Raul Mendez, who played Aurelio's brother Chacorta in the first three seasons, and that he has moved to L.A. where Kate lives.

Also in the real news department, Vicente Carrillo Leyva, the son of Amado Carrillo Fuentes (the inspiration for Aurelio Casillas and the real Senor de los Cielos) has lost a bid for amparo. He's now filed for an injunction against the denial. Apparently, there's been a change in the law and whatever they think he did is no longer illegal, but they won't apply the new law to him since he was arrested before it took effect. (That's from my understanding of Spanish news articles, so no guarantee I'm correct.)

With only two weeks left for Season 4, I wonder who will be killed off. I hope it's rival Feyo, who ordered the killing of the Mexican college students, and the cop Roviaro, but not Feyo's Colombian money laundering girlfriend Felina. I also want Super Javi and Tijeras to live. I don't much care whether the Engineer (the tunnel builder) or Mexican figurehead President Omar Teran lives or dies. I'd love to see Victor get taken out, preferably by the Mara Salvatrucha, the uber-violent gang from El Salvador he imported to Mexico to take over the street trade from the Colombians. (The gang was very loyal to Victor's father, Chachorta.)

I suspect Felina will take out The Officer, who started out quite interesting, but whose role has rapidly been denigrated by the writers. I also hope Aurelio's younger daughter who is now in drug rehab in Switzerland is gone for good. I'm okay with Rutila, his other daughter. And there is no Senor de los Cielos without Monica Robles, so while there are rumors about what happens to her on her and Victor's wedding day at the end of this season, I think she will survive to Season 5. Why does every narco wedding in narco-dramas end in a shootout?

Coming to Univision/Unimas this month: The extremely successful Spanish series El Principe. It's about a Christian intelligence agent who is sent to the border of Morocco to investigate a terror cell and falls in love with the Muslim sister of a major drug trafficker.

In yet other news, I'm glad to see Johnny Depp has ventured out in public in LA for the first time since his divorce scandal broke. Check out the Gonzo pin he is wearing. (I used to have a blazer just like his jacket, it was one of my favorites.)

In the hour it's taken me to write this, there are fireworks now going on all over I can see them in all directions from my windows -- but the rain just started falling, it seems like another storm.

I had more topics to discuss, Baghdad and computers among them, but they'll have to wait.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< "Snatched" and the Story of Operation Princess | FBI Announces No Charges Against Hillary Over Use of Email Server >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Bernie Secret Service Cost (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 05:12:23 AM EST
    Just saw on CNN that his SScost is $40k per day. And until he concedes he has the coverage. If he uses it right up to the convention, it will be $2 million for the tax payers based upon from the time of his last primary until then.

    He is currently back in the Senate and has the motorcade with the Secret Service entourage while some just drive to work in their own car. This is so Donald like and I find it so discouraging this candidate is being so wasteful. I sincerely hope he pays this back as I had more respect for him then this little tidbit.

    Hope he pays it back? (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 05:59:45 AM EST
    have you been sneaking into kdog's stash?

    Parent
    We need to cut (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:24:27 AM EST
    him some slack.  Sanders can't drop out until he has released his tax returns--he will get them out before the conventions, for sure.  But, Jane is still working on them.  

    Parent
    No one but Jane will ever see them (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:55:24 AM EST
    and no one is obligated to release them...not even Trump who likely keeps his stashed away with Jane's for safe keeping.

    Parent
    New Rule: (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:10:58 AM EST
    Any and all criticisms of Mrs. Clinton that derive from her tax returns (complete returns have been released going back decades) are off limits because fairness.  

    Parent
    If that bothers you... (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:28:23 PM EST
    you must be appalled at the multi-millionaire Bill Clinton collecting a pension and SS detail for life on the taxpayer's dime.

    Bernie can't afford his own security, Bill can.  And if the hate around here is any indication, Bernie may actually require the security.

    Parent

    Oh, Bernie (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:43:12 PM EST
    can well afford his own security but why pay for it when you can get it free? Bernie is a multi millionaire.

    Parent
    He should make a donation (none / 0) (#111)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:46:11 PM EST
    to the Clinton Library; they're in the midst of expanding the STD section.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#128)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:17:58 PM EST
    they should name it the #Feelthebern section.

    Parent
    A nice touch..a tribute, if you will (none / 0) (#134)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:38:39 PM EST
    Bernie who (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:47:39 PM EST
    Now?

    Parent
    Bill (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:47:30 PM EST
    Gets it by way of statute.

    Bernie got it because as a presidential candidate, he was ALLIWED TO REQUEST IT ON A TEMPORARY BASIS. But it's time to ket the dream go.

    Parent

    That's his call... (none / 0) (#117)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:54:12 PM EST
    and I respect it...especially with all the Brutus coming at him from the center left.

    Anyway, more proof of relevance of the Bern here at TL in dog days of July.  I get a big kick out of how you all love to hate him so much.  Can't wait to hear what his latest grave sin is in August! ;)

    Parent

    Oh, he's one kickass excoriating (none / 0) (#122)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:10:44 PM EST
    the GOP speech from being relegated back to harmless old futzer with a heart of gold status.

    Parent
    Bernie will probably still "be running" (none / 0) (#127)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:16:27 PM EST
    He'll likely be running from Jane- (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by midcenturymod on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 03:13:32 PM EST
    she definitely doesn't seem ready to give up the spotlight or her paycheck. I  kinda worry about  him-he has too many hangers-on!

    Parent
    kdog: Are you suggesting that (none / 0) (#179)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 12:25:12 PM EST
    when you like someone in the political world, it is fair & good to give that individual (here: Sanders) the benefit-of-the-doubt and support no matter what, but that if you don't like that person (here: HRC) then that person must always be viewed & presumed to be wrong always and everywhere? It sure seems like plain old higher standards for the one you strongly dislike and lower standards for the one you obviously strongly like.  

    That apparent reality--together with the almost angry defensiveness that is starting to show--tells me that the morality cover professed in your earlier political arguments is slipping.

    Parent

    I like how you switch that (none / 0) (#186)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:46:00 PM EST
    anger-defensiveness detector on and off depending on who the poster is, Christine..

    I think that's another variation on the phenomenon you seem to be attributing to kdog..

    The benefit of a doubt for some and none whatsoever for some others..

    Parent

    But then, I have a good model in you, jondee (none / 0) (#192)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:36:48 PM EST
    As Mr Charles Yardbird Parker (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:42:21 PM EST
    used to say: do as I say, not as I do. ;-)  


    Parent
    One gets... (none / 0) (#187)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:55:39 PM EST
    benefit of the doubt until there is little or nothing left to doubt about their character or body of work.  And no pol gets unconditional support ever, support by word or vote always comes with conditions and can be revoked at any time.

    It is accurate to say I like me some Bernie, and accepting SS security for the remainder of the campaign does nothing to change that.  It appears to me some of our TL friends would punch him in the nose if they had the chance.  If he collects a congressional pension in retirement and starts making 6-7 figures a year on the speech circuit my opinion will change, that much I can promise you.

    As it is accurate to say I dislike me some Bill Clinton, and it bothers me that he accepts a pension whose purpose was to keep ex-presidents from cashing in on the seal, while cashing in on the seal.  Where I'm from we call that double-dipping and it is frowned upon.  

    Perhaps it is time to retire the presidential pension if all ex-presidents are gonna be cashing in.  With urgency if Drumph wins, taxpayers gave that grifter enough already via legislated corporate bankruptcy profit schemes supported by Republicans and "pro-business" Turd Way Democrats alike.

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#191)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:35:13 PM EST
    A thought: I can appreciate your approach to acceptance of pensions in some respect... but, I am wary of where & who draws the limits; and, I wonder about the slippery-slope potential of only giving pensions if a dollar-qualifying litmus test as to retirement assets define when one in our country is entitled to pensions or not.

    What I would ask is that you reconsider using the cutesy, but very insulting to center-left Democrats as myself, trope "Turd Way." I'm not sure what that accomplishes, other than imitate those days when we all tossed spitballs from the back of the room in middle-school biology class.
    (What say we each take teensy steps off our moral high-ground poses.)

    Parent

    It accomplishes blunt and colorful accuracy... (none / 0) (#194)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:55:15 PM EST
    the third way was/is a turd.  So accurate I had to steal it, all credit to jondee for coining the perfect phrase.  Juvenile?  

    Means testing can be troubling, like Hillary's new proposal to make public university education free for families under 125k.  I like it, but a family making 150k with 4 kids in NYC or SF could use it too. You'll be shocked to learn I like Bernie's idea of free for all funded by a speculator's transaction tax better....it's not like millionaires' kids would be caught dead at SUNY Oneonta anyway, I don't see many who can easily afford college abusing it, they like their private schools.

    Parent

    What about those blue-collar workers (none / 0) (#197)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 03:25:19 PM EST
    who still have pensions in their future (unfortunately, not enough) AND who, bit by bit through "putting a little away each month" from youth out of fear of future pennilessness (like some of my immigrant Polish relatives who worked in PA steel mills) and luck grew fairly substantial retirement assets?  To whom does a "means test" apply?  

    Anyway, I still find the "turd" trope juvenile and somewhat sh*%%y in itself.  But then, we all have our opinions of politicians ....as I also have a similar preference for referring to a certain holier-than-thou politician by his initials "BS," because it honestly conveys so much more.  Even trade: One Turd(Way) for One BS :)

    Parent

    Why should he not accept a pension? (none / 0) (#198)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 04:24:09 PM EST
    Now you've got me defending Bernie...to you!!!

    Parent
    I see, you think it should be needs based (none / 0) (#199)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 04:26:36 PM EST
    That is a slippery slope regarding pensions. I don't want to go there.

    Parent
    For committing the one and only (none / 0) (#102)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:35:03 PM EST
    mortal sin in the secular Turd Way Politics universe.

    There's no coming back from that. No redemption possible.

    Parent

    Yeah, (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:21:42 AM EST
    he's not going to pay any of that back. I'm not even sure he's paid back the money from taking his family on all expenses paid trip to the Vatican. He seems to be on a big time ego trip and I guess it will end when the convention comes around because you can no longer be a candidate once there's an official nominee. His behavior has just been really bizarre.

    Parent
    Given that the (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:20:23 AM EST
    Secret Service members exist, along with the equipment they use, then CNN is saying that the incremental cost is $40K a day.

    That seems a bit much.

    In the meantime Obama is flying down to NC with Hillary on board.

    Has any other president used tax payer owned facilities in such a blatant political manner?

    Parent

    The DNC is paying for some (half?) (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:50:04 AM EST
    And the HRC campaign is paying for half.  Oops.  Your outrage just got blown away.

    But answer me this, Jim.  Were you having heart palpitations when Trump went to Scotland on a purely business outing with his Secret Service detail?


    Parent

    Oh, you know (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:07:59 AM EST
    the answer to that question before you even ask it. For GOP outrage junkies it's all about control. Hillary should be doing what they tell her to do not what is in the best interest of her campaign and the best interest of the voters of this county. Also remember that it's okay for Republican presidents to fly over a city on Air Force One and watch people die and hire a horse lawyer to run things.

    Parent
    He was so outraged (none / 0) (#24)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:59:45 AM EST
    his trembling fingers forced him to leave off sewing Star of David patches for the Trump campaign

    Parent
    Every other (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:32:29 AM EST
    president has done the exact same thing. And it's probably saving tax payers money doing it that way. Would you rather pay more money for Hillary's Secret Service detail to fly on their own plane?

    Parent
    You mean, like, when President G.W. Bush ... (none / 0) (#150)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:01:54 PM EST
    ... traveled on Air Force One to Arizona in September 2005 to headline a fundraiser for Sen. John McCain? (I won't get into what was happening to New Orleans at the time.)

    Look, presidents have to adhere to their own security protocols even when they're politicking, as politicians are wont to do. To begrudge any one of them, Republican or Democrat, the use of Air Force One in order to do so is absurd. What's President Obama supposed to do here -- book a round trip on Delta Air Lines?

    Jeez, Jim, use your head for something besides a hat rack.

    Parent

    Well, no one ever accused him of being a fiscal (none / 0) (#73)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:55:14 AM EST
    conservative. And that is one of the things I like about him.

    Parent
    I think I'm okay with Bern keeping (none / 0) (#145)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 03:48:28 PM EST
    SServ until November. A lot of volatile people out there right now. And it's a bargain compared to what a military contractor charges you for the same service.

    I want all future candidates to know that we will do what we can to keep them safe.

    And we don't know that SServ doesn't have a risk assessment that supports Bernie continuing to have them on duty.

    It cost 2 mil for one general to change the PT signs on Ft Rucker for his 2 yr stay. Keep Bernie safe.

    Parent

    Bernie is ok (none / 0) (#156)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:53:41 PM EST
    Just annoyed that he doesn't do the right thing and concede. He can still take his revolution to the platform but with his holding out at those few I endorse H words, it splits up the unification of the Democratic party. As for the Secret Service costs, he does still have funds which I feel should pay reimbursement on an agreed percentage. It makes him look like a hypocrite and I think we are better than our rivals. If he conceded after the DC Primary, he loses his SS detail. But by holding out, he is acting like the politicians he berates all the time. Like taking money for a speaking engagement. I feel like a hostage awaiting his blessing and release.

    As for getting into anyone's stash, been there done that. I am still a Leon Russell fan. Loved the glasses, hated the hat.  

    Parent

    Any fan of Leon (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:24:19 PM EST
    is a fan of mine.

    Parent
    I think everything you suggested (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:52:35 PM EST
    And point out is legit.

    Parent
    Well, (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:14:54 AM EST
    sorry email trolls. There's going to be no indictment or anything.

    Stick your head out the window (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:16:08 AM EST
    And you can hear the heads explodng

    Parent
    Has BTD gone to ground? (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:46:02 AM EST
    No tweets!

    Parent
    Day job? (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:00:53 AM EST
    Could be. Now he's on it. (none / 0) (#103)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:35:13 PM EST
    My first tweet re this:  BBC.

    Parent
    equal justice under the law (none / 0) (#52)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:26:18 AM EST
    as any reasonable prosecutor would recommend in a case of "clearly reckless" handling of classified material

    time for Bernie to endorse & for everyone to move on


    Parent

    Huh, Addams Family? (none / 0) (#185)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:36:10 PM EST
    Minor, but legally significant, correction: The phrase used by Comey was "exceedingly careless." If that phrase had used a common legal framing--"reckless"--then the presumably sarcastic reference to equal application could be on point.  As it is, the commentary describing the behavior of the SOS and State itself with regard to management of certain information as "careless" is a common word appropriately applied to behavior leading to mistakes.  (From time to time, I would even describe some of my own acts as careless ... it does happen with most of us :) )

    Parent
    The "indictment" bullet was removed (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by BTAL on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:20:32 AM EST
    But Comey validated all the political elements that have up to this point been part of the discussion.  

    Official transcript of Comey's statement provides numerous sections that debunk the Clinton campaign talking points.  Comey didn't remove this an issue but in many ways made it a permanent election millstone.

    And as (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:35:00 AM EST
    more information is released we probably will find that Comey has been playing politics. The truth is the GOP set the bar at indictment so nothing else really matters at this point. Do you really want to run a Republican presidential campaign discussing the nuances of retroactive classification which is something Comey did not talk about.

    Comey seemed to have a bitter attitude about having to do it.

    Parent

    Comey is a political person. (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by caseyOR on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:05:38 PM EST
    A Republican who is not, and never has been, above the political fray. Why Obama chose to appoint Jim Comey as FBI Director has always eluded me. Just another futile, worthless attempt at making nice to Republicans.

    Geez, I hope Hillary has learned from Obama's mistakes when it comes to "working with" the Republicans.She is the only politician the GOP hates more than Obama.

    Parent

    Strange thing (none / 0) (#55)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:28:51 AM EST
    This was highly unusual for him to make a public and fairly partisan, statement like this.

    Comey said "it's possible" HRC's emails were hacked (although he offers no proof).  

    His comments also appear to violate DOJ's rules for commenting on an ongoing investigation.

    Parent

    He explained why he (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by BTAL on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:36:15 AM EST
    was making the presentation in his opening statement and that it is now a completed vs on-going investigation (from the FBI perspective(:

    After a tremendous amount of work over the last year, the FBI is completing its investigation and referring the case to the Department of Justice for a prosecutive decision. What I would like to do today is tell you three things: what we did; what we found; and what we are recommending to the Department of Justice.

    This will be an unusual statement in at least a couple ways. First, I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest. Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.

    Regarding potential hacking, he protected himself and the FBI in the event it was and that shoe drops in the future - cautious move.  He did specifically address his rationale (and validated previously reports regarding risks):

    With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton's use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account.


    Parent
    Like I said (none / 0) (#65)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:43:15 AM EST
    Seemingly against DOJ policy (the FBI is partt if the DOJ, remember) and pure speculation on his part.  Odd for someone trained as a lawyer (and supposedly neutral) to do that, unless one is actually trying to make a case.

    My guess is, he's still a Republican and this was him throwing his partu a bone.  What will be fun is if (when) Hillary wins, he will still most likely be the FBI Director and will work for her, as directors serve 10 year terms to help keep them "above the fray".

    Parent

    Republicans (none / 0) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:47:52 AM EST
    should actually be calling for Comey's head if they think that he's not doing his job. Bottom line for Republicans is either they have been lying to the other members of their party for over a year about this OR Comey is lying. If you think Comey is lying and then after Orlando you should be raising a stink to get rid of him.

    Parent
    Not really a fan but (none / 0) (#71)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:54:32 AM EST
    Rush claims he never thought Hillary would face charges.

    He goes on to tell listeners not to expect she will be charged.

    Parent

    That's hystiercal (none / 0) (#109)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:44:38 PM EST
    after telling them for a long time she was going to face charges when push comes to shove he does a 180.

    Parent
    Now the FBI (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:56:30 AM EST
    will have more time to investigate the actual hacking of the Department of Defense materials.  And, begin to investigate the carelessness of those FBI agents who slipped up on Omar Mateen and the Tsarnaev Brothers.

    In the meanwhile, the wingnut version of Kubler Ross's five stages of grief should be of help to Republicans: 1. denial ,2. denial, 3, denial, 4, denial, and, 5, denial.

    Parent

    FBI playing (none / 0) (#81)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:01:00 PM EST
    Orlando close to the vest.

    Problem is Florida has some of the strongest sunshine laws in the country.

    Parent

    Meanwhile (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:01:14 PM EST
    Trump is doing exactly the worst possble thing he could do.  Tweeting how it's "rigged" and "she should be in jail" instead of making the somewhat more valid case of an error in judgement.

    It's been said many times that the Clintons are almost preternaturally lucky in their enemies and adversaries.  Trump could well be the ultimate expression of this theory.

    Parent

    Comey's report (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:18:13 PM EST
    needs to be read no further than: after a year-long investigation, there are no charges.  The rest is gratuitous.  And, you sure are right, the she should be in jail stuff will do wonders for his followers, but another ho hum, there he goes again, from the rest.

     Hard to keep track of all of those Trumpisms, and he made that crooked part radio-active after his anti-semitic dog whistle. Of course, the Republicans would never think to attack Mrs Clinton on policies.  Trump, has none, at least none that are discernible from the bombast.  Believe me.

    Parent

    Her errors in judgement (none / 0) (#91)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:21:27 PM EST
    is called "gross negligence" and is why she should be preparing for trial.

    And given that some of the emails were graded classified before she received/resent them it is impossible to see how she isn't guilty.

    Parent

    How (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:33:57 PM EST
    many investigators did you have looking into it?
    Comey(from transcript)
    Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way
    and his agents did not see what you see.

    Parent
    Interesting that you (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 03:25:09 PM EST
    don't provide a link. Here, let me help.

    This helped us recover work-related e-mails that were not among the 30,000 produced to State. Still others we recovered from the laborious review of the millions of e-mail fragments dumped into the slack space of the server decommissioned in 2013.

    With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been "up-classified."

    Transcript

    1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer--
    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    US Code

    Parent

    Apoatently you missed it (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 04:38:42 PM EST
    Trevore was trying to quote a law professor/Homeland Security expert with what he thought was a "gotcha!" re:  this bery definition of gross negligence.

    However....

    Then, the two criminal statutes to which Clinton's critics point seem to require more than what's happened here. A section of the Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime for a government officer to engage in "gross negligence" that allows national security secrets to be removed from their "proper place of custody." Even if there were an argument that merely discussing sensitive subjects over email is tantamount to removing them from proper custody, the widespread use of private email servers by other government officials would make it near-impossible to establish "gross negligence" here.

    The federal statute that deals with the less serious offense of mishandling classified information only makes it a crime for an official to "knowingly remove" such material "without authority and with the intent to retain" it. Again, it's not clear that merely discussing classified information is what Congress meant to prohibit. But even if it were, there's nothing to suggest that, unlike former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, who physically removed secret documents from the National Archives, Clinton intended to deprive the government of possession of the information discussed in her emails.

    Out of luck, pal.

    Parent

    Still (none / 0) (#146)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 04:11:07 PM EST
    no proof of gross negligence, I know you think you are an expert on everything, but what in this case makes you smarter than the FBI?

    Parent
    Amendment 1 of (none / 0) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 07:52:08 AM EST
    the US Constitution.

    That good enough for you?


    Parent

    The secret woid of the day is (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:56:56 PM EST
    "gross negligence".

    I wonder if you googled Clinton + gross negligence, how many hits you'd get today..

    One thing about the wingers, they stay on the same page: someone sends out a "gross negligence" pheromone, and they all fall in line pointing in the same direction like rapacious Amazonian bullet ants.

    Parent

    No kidding (none / 0) (#137)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:59:39 PM EST
    It's like Sesame Street for wingnuts.

    The word for the day is

    GROSS NEGLIGENCE

    Parent

    But if elected.,,,,,,, (none / 0) (#157)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:00:15 PM EST
    he would immediately have her arrested, tried, and put in prison during his first 100 days. Or so his next tweets will promise. Heh.

    Parent
    Clinton has a millstone (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:58:54 AM EST
    and the GOP is swimming with a millstone for a life preserver.

    Parent
    Another day (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:38:16 AM EST
    Another non-scandal hyped by our resident nuts... On to the next one.

    4th of July weekend... (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:32:57 PM EST
    was good for the Metsies...bats rise from the dead and we win 5 in a row.  Swept the Cubs outta town like it was the 2015 NLCS, and a beautiful come back win against the surprising Marlins yesterday.

    Closed the gap to 4 games back, and old friend Jose Reyes coming back home to Flushing for tonight's game.  Let's hope there is something left in them magic legs.

    Props where props are due, kdog. (none / 0) (#105)
    by caseyOR on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:42:14 PM EST
    It was a great run for the Mets and a sad sad run for my Cubbies. Hope it was not a prelude to the rest of the season. :-(

    Parent
    I was at Thursday night's game... (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:49:15 PM EST
    with a new ladyfriend who is a diehard Cubs fan.  I had to swallow so much trash talk for 6 innings as it looked like we'd never score, with apologetic looks to the other Mets faithful in our section for bringing a Cubs fan to rub our noses in it, before Cespedes mammoth third deck homer turned our prolonged slump and losing streak upside down.

    Thank goodness Ces fell back in our lap, we'd be lost without ol' Marlboro Red.

    Parent

    Marlins looked really good v. (none / 0) (#120)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    the Pads.  But the Yankees didn't.

    Parent
    Yankees? (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:29:39 PM EST
    They still have a team in the Bronx?  Who knew? ;)

    Parent
    No mas Mexico travels for you? (none / 0) (#124)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:11:39 PM EST
    No travels... (none / 0) (#129)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:21:48 PM EST
    with the special lady south of the border since way back in Jan. 2014 my friend.  We keep in touch but things cooled off and life got in the way for the both of us.  She wants and deserves someone more present than I.

    Never say never though!  There has been some recent talk of a rendezvous.

    Parent

    is much more geographically desirable!

    Parent
    Glad you found such a loyal lady! (none / 0) (#174)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 10:25:18 AM EST
    and brave too, shooting her mouth off at the Mets' home!

    Parent
    The alleged wife beater? (none / 0) (#138)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 02:16:43 PM EST
    You can have him. Glad the Rockies had the class to let that loser go.  

    Parent
    We'll take him... (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 02:28:03 PM EST
    I just hope he's got something left.  Welcome home Jose...now go steal some bases and manufacture runs.  If red hot Wilmer Flores of the 6 fer 6 w/ 2 homers on Sunday lets you near 3rd Base;)

    Parent
    Sigh, I can't argue. (none / 0) (#173)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 10:23:47 AM EST
    Freakin' Mets.

    Parent
    Abner Mikva (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 03:44:52 PM EST
    a great liberal and man of even greater integrity has passed, at age 90.  A former DC appellate judge, appointed by Jimmy Carter, counselor to President Clinton, and Chicago icon, was a mentor to Elena Kagan.  

    The famous story Judge Mikva told was his attempt to get into politics while a law student at the University of Chicago.  He went his local Democratic ward committeeman asking to work for Adlai Stevenson.  The committeeman took his fedora off and cigar out of his mouth long enough to ask: who sent you? Mikva said, no one sent me, only to be told by the committeeman that he did want nobody who was not sent by somebody.

    Initiated by 'Beautycon Media' (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by Nemi on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 04:25:10 PM EST
    Hillary Clinton met with and took questions from young 'digital influencers' in a Creator Town Hall last week.

    She seemed relaxed and at ease even though some in the the audience, probably mostly Bernie Sanders voters, seemed to 'know'(!) little more about her and her accomplishments than 'she voted for the war' and 'she calls black children super predators'(!). Among the questions was this from a young black woman:

    You've garnered a lot of mistrust from the black community based on unfortunate and detrimental past events. You can just look through the comments on my Instagram posts about this event and see for yourself. So I would like to know, what are your concrete plans to win back the trust of Black America?

    If Hillary Clinton was annoyed about the unfairness of the personal accusation in the question it didn't show, but instead she listed not only how she had won the black vote overwhelmingly in the primaries, but also how she had gone to work with and for black Americans ever since her very first job out of Law School, working for the Children's Defence Fund, and from then, on and on and on ... a very long list of accomplishments. She ended by saying:

    But I also do respectfully ask that people know a little bit more about what I have done and why the Congressional Black Caucus supported me, why other black leaders supported me: Because I've been there and I will continue to be there, and I hope we will make more progress when I am President.

    Another place where Hillary Clinton made an outreach, of sorts, was writing a piece for the now closed Blog, The Toast. A wonderful site with wonderful writers and commenters, a site that I'd never heard about prior to Hillary Clinton's complimentary piece, which was kind of the talk of the virtual town, last week. Not unlike Shakesville, The Toast is, has been, thanks to a fierce moderation, a safe space for women to be and to comment.

    Hillary Clinton's 'bio' accompanying the piece:

    Hillary Clinton is a former First Lady, senator, and Secretary of State, and is currently running for President. She thinks your hair looks great exactly as it is.

    :-) Probably written by one of the editors as they have a most wonderful sense of humour. If nothing else I recommend reading what The Two Monks have been up to. Literally Laughing-Out-Loud funny ... and totally endearing.

    Trump's hero in the WOT (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by ExPatObserver on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:18:08 PM EST
    You're not going to guess. Ok, you might guess, but still....
    Saddam Hussein?

    Not the first time (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:25:15 PM EST
    At least he's consistent! (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by ExPatObserver on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:29:26 PM EST
    Putin is another favorite, of course.
    Putin has been a great success. Now, instead of terrorists attacking Moscow, they go from the Caucusus to blow themselves up in Istanbul and Europe.

    Parent
    tin foil moment (none / 0) (#162)
    by ExPatObserver on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:42:55 PM EST
    but why don't they attack Russian (as much) these days? is Putin paying terrorists in the Caucasus to "Go West"?

    Parent
    Gretchen Carlson (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by CST on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 11:43:02 AM EST
    Filing a sexual harassment suit against Roger Ailes.

    ""We believe that Mr. Ailes' behavior toward Gretchen, as described in the complaint, speaks volumes about what she had to endure. The evidence will show that Ailes deliberately sabotaged the career of a talented, hard-working journalist and loyal Fox News employee. Opposing sexism and rejecting unwanted sexual come-ons should never cost a woman her job or subject her to disparagement and emotional anguish," said Martin Hyman, a partner in the New York firm Golenbock Eiseman Assor Bell & Peskoe LLP, who, is co-counsel for Carlson.
    The complaint seeks compensatory damages, damages for mental anguish, and punitive damages."

    Some pretty damning (but IMO, not that surprising) claims in there.

    Prbably still (none / 0) (#176)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 12:06:27 PM EST
    vote for Trump.

    Parent
    Ailes does seem to have this (none / 0) (#180)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 12:26:04 PM EST
    Hitchcock-like fixation on blondes..

    Previously I thought it was just about targeting the more-Aryan-the-better crowd. But then, Fox always had them.

    Parent

    Was Benjamin Crump (5.00 / 1) (#209)
    by fishcamp on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 01:59:07 PM EST
    sitting stage right behind Comey and in front of Halperin?

    Trey Gowdy looks so much like a science fiction character, and kudos to the cameraman for holding the last shot so long.  Not sure even Capt Howdy could create that image in the studio.

    I forgot about this NASA probe (none / 0) (#1)
    by McBain on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:51:52 AM EST
    Juno
    Operating in an ever-changing elliptical orbit around Jupiter's poles, Juno will make repeated low-altitude passes between 2,600 and 4,900 miles above the cloud tops to study the planet's atmosphere, its powerful magnetic field, the resulting radiation environment and to find out whether a rocky core lurks in the deep interior, possibly under a thick layer of liquid metallic hydrogen.

    Jupiter is like a mini solar system.  I'm looking forward to learning more about it. There's a theory that we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the protection Jupiter gives us by taking in some of the asteroids that would eventually hit us.

    In other news, I watched a pretty good fireworks show tonight in Santa Clara, CA.  It was part of all day festival the city put on.  It had a mid America feel I don't often get living in Silicon Valley.  

    The video Juno took (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:50:41 AM EST
    Of the planet and the Galilean moons in its approach before the observation equipment had to be turned off for the orbital insertion is pretty darn cool.

    LINK

    Parent

    With the solar collectors deployed, (none / 0) (#165)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:26:56 PM EST
    the soon to be orbiter is the size of a football field, according to one of the project managers interviewed today on npr.

    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 08:27:02 AM EST
    More the size of a basketball court.  They showed a bunch of things demonstrating the relative size in the live broadcast the other night.

    It's a triangle shape.  If it sits on a basketball it hangs off a bit

    Parent

    Was it (none / 0) (#177)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 12:15:52 PM EST
    The one who can't pronounce nuclear ?

    Parent
    Serena threatens to sue (none / 0) (#8)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:44:54 AM EST
    Tennis players revolted over rain breaks at Wimbledon on Tuesday as organisers faced claims they were overlooking safety to get matches played on time.

    Serena Williams threatened to sue a referee over slippery playing conditions and two other players erupted with rage after being refused a lavatory break.

    link

    I am still watching the tour and have to say riding a bicycle down hill at 70KPH on a rain slick technical descent seems more dangerous.  Even avoiding road furniture on a rain slick road riding in a peloton at 40KPH would scare me.  To say nothing of having to even sit on a bike and pedal for four hours+ daily (with only a couple of rest days) and the toll that takes on ones body.

    Sorry but tennis players seem like sissies to me.

    Well yes, other things are more dangerous (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:37:00 AM EST
    So what? Slipping on a wet surface and tearing an ACL could shorten or end the careers of these players. it is a big deal, and has nothing to do with being a sissy.

    I dare you to call Serena a sissy to her face.

    Parent

    Can I call (none / 0) (#42)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:03:57 AM EST
    Serena a sissy to her face on a wet surface.

    How about if I am riding my bike on a wet slick downhill and she it too much of a sissy to do the same.

    Don't forget I have finished 15 Ironman distance triathlons, where there is no stoppage for rain; and no time outs.  I set the fastest bike split for my age group in one.

    I have seen tennis players on clay courts slip and slide even in dry conditions.  That is why clay courts are so different than other courts.

    I have also set age group records in the 50k cross country state championship so maybe I could call her a sissy and then simply run away and not get caught.

    Parent

    Still put my money on Serena (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:23:52 AM EST
    Let me know (none / 0) (#75)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:55:39 AM EST
    when she is going to race me in the rain over technical hills, or even not technical hills.

    Parent
    I have seen some stupid arguments on this (5.00 / 5) (#80)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:00:19 PM EST
    site, but this one takes it. Again, what happens in an entirely different sport is irrelevant.

    Parent
    Lucky for you, Serena (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by caseyOR on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:01:05 PM EST
    is a tennis player, not a competitive cyclist. Had she chosen cycling I have no doubt, given her natural athletic talents, her intelligence, her work ethic and her competitive nature, she would crush you.

    So go ahead, blather away about how biking in the rain proves you are not a sissy. And thank your lucky stars Serena Williams did not choose cycling.

    Parent

    That is just silly (none / 0) (#125)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:12:02 PM EST
    There is a reason no women play in the NFL, NBA, or ride in the Tour de France.  I actually trained with a former winner of the Tour de Femme and was able to keep up with her.

    I would describe Serena as a fast twitch athlete as opposed to a slow twitch athlete.  Her strength is fast reaction to a ball and getting maybe 10-20 feet as quickly as possible.  Bike riders are more of a slow twitch athlete who are able to ride a bike maybe 4-10 hours straight, often eating during the ride to replace the gas in their tank.

    It will be interesting to see how Serena ranks compared to say Jackie Joyner-Kersee since  Sports Illustrated for Women magazine voted Joyner-Kersee the Greatest Female Athlete of the 20th century.  Jackie Joyner-Kersee was a fast twitch athlete, the longest distance she ran was 800meters.  The reason I mention this is she did compete in some 5K events (the shortest distance a slow twitch athlete competes in) and her times were never better than my fastest 5K time.

    While Serena might do well in some of the shorter track bike races like individual pursuit I am not sure she could compete in cycling at anything above the Cat 3 Level.

    Parent

    Ragebot, I would love to see (5.00 / 4) (#135)
    by fishcamp on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:51:48 PM EST
    You race against RepackRider.  He would undoubtedly kick your butt since he wouldn't be dragging his heavy ego along.

    Parent
    That I would pay to watch (none / 0) (#151)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:07:22 PM EST
    Sell tickets please

    Parent
    On this we agree (none / 0) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:10:41 AM EST
    and think the same when it comes to golfers.

    Parent
    FBI Director (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:02:44 AM EST
    To speak in moments.  Eghazi announcement is expected.

    Hours before the joint (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:04:28 AM EST
    Obama Hillary appearance.

    LET THE BEDWETTING BEGIN!!

    Parent

    I would be (none / 0) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:10:11 AM EST
    surprised if he even mentioned Eghazi.

    Parent
    That is the expected topic (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:21:50 AM EST
    Seems a bit odd he would make a surprise announcement and take no question and talk about anything else.

    What do you think he wants to talk about.

    Parent

    Questions (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:02:54 AM EST
    Fox also reported question (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:04:55 AM EST
    Would be taken.  Everyplace else has said no questions.


    Parent
    Didn't know (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:26:14 AM EST
    he was not taking questions.

    I have no freaking idea what he would talk about. Frankly I hope he ends it with his statement but honestly considering Comey's reputation I would imagine he won't do that and will just kick the can down the road.

    Parent

    Mediaite (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:32:35 AM EST

    Just three days after completing a highly-publicized 3.5 hour interview with the former Secretary of State, the FBI is prepared to give a press conference this morning. FBI Director James Comey is scheduled to give the remarks at 11 a.m., which are on an unspecific topic.

    Last week, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced that she was prepared to receive the recommendation from the FBI about the investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server and the handling of classified information.

    Political Twitter immediately wagered their best bets about the press conference and what we might expect to hear when Comey takes to the microphone. Many are pointing to the fact that Clinton is scheduled to make her first campaign stop later today alongside President Barack Obama as a likely indicator about how Comey's remarks may be colored:

    He has long been expected to make the announcement.  It has been widely reported they want this over before the conventions.  An announcement has been expected before the conceptions.

    I assume the Clintn campaign is hoping and praying, and perhaps expecting, Trump goes after Comey.  Who is one of the most respected people in government.  Especially by republicans.


    Parent

    LAWNEWZ on Comey (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:40:26 AM EST

    Except that FBI Director James Comey is a Republican who worked for, and supported, George Bush. And then maxed out his donations for Mitt Romney's campaign too. More important, in the legal community he is universally respected for his willingness to make tough, often politically inexpedient, decisions no matter which party it benefits or even which President/boss it may alienate.

    In this day and age, it is nearly startling that his nomination for FBI Director was supported almost unanimously in the Senate (oh Rand). He is also no stranger to taking on the Clintons and reaching some damning conclusions. Bottom line, we should all wish there were more James Comeys in law enforcement and if he decides the law was broken, then team Clinton will have suffered an encumbering blow (regardless of whether it results in an actual indictment). But if he does not, I certainly hope the smear machines will move on and rev up their engines for a more appropriate and deserving target.



    Parent
    Oh, this is (none / 0) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:00:13 AM EST
    bigger than the Trump campaign. Do you know how many conservative news services have been shopping this that are now going to have to go after Comey or either admit they were lying to their readers or wrong the entire last year?

    There are some theories that Bill met with Loretta specifically so she could recuse herself and Comey would have to be the one to deliver the news.

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:07:01 AM EST
    One meme circulating is that he had better either announce an indictment or his resignation.

    I expect neither.

    Parent

    Right wing media (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:53:09 AM EST
    And social media is already losing its mind.   Google "Comey announcement" and enjoy.

    Parent
    And Chris Cilizza (none / 0) (#37)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:41:55 AM EST
    All media is in (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:06:26 AM EST
    The five stages of grief.  Andrea Mitchell is hysterical.

    Shorter Mitchell

    "This is very very bad news for Hillary Clinton.  Perhaps not as bad s we were hoping for but very very bad. ". Adding "Comeys highly unusual announcement is a direct effect of the meeting between Bill and the AG"

    Pete Williams "well, ahem, no, Andrea, that sort of announcement has been expected for weeks because of the nature of the situation". And "no one expected an indictment who understands the law"

    Parent

    Unbelievable. Truly. (none / 0) (#77)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:56:54 AM EST
    Black helicopter alert (none / 0) (#23)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:58:27 AM EST
    This Guy Keeps Getting Killed in Terrorist Attacks

    I have seen several false flag claims related to this guy, and this explanation seems to destroy them.

    Here is (none / 0) (#48)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:21:34 AM EST
    Thx 4 correction (none / 0) (#60)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:36:53 AM EST
    I am only on my second cup of coffee and trying to keep up with Comey presser.

    Parent
    Hillary isn't a criminal (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:21:45 AM EST
    She's just too special to follow the law and to dumb to know she violated the law.

    I just can't wait until I get to tell the judge that I didn't know the speed limit was 30. I am sure he'll let me go.

    You completely (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:27:42 AM EST
    missed it. However what you are saying is basically you are blaming Hillary for talk radio and Fox News lying and lying to you and you believing their BS.

    Parent
    jim's response to this comment was deleted (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:40:45 AM EST
    for name-calling. You may not call Hillary names.

    Parent
    Okay, I assume that applies to Nixon, Bush (none / 0) (#41)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:01:18 AM EST
    et al... And as always, you are the owner so your rules apply and I'll try not to violate them.

    Now...GA, please explain why you would support anyone who has, willfully or out of ignorance, violated 18 USC Section 793

    (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer--
    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    Now if her actions don't define gross neglience then nothing does.

    And if you want to claim she didn't know then her judgment is too poor work as a manager for a MacDonald's franchise much less be president.

    Parent

    Odd (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:32:17 AM EST
    But not unexpected decision.
    Odd that Comey specifically laid the grounds for gross negligence, specifying all the actions taken by Clinton and her staff that were wrong, and then state no charges will be recommended. The press conference will not calm down the talk of Madame Sec's server.

    And now Madame Sec will also after deal with those rabid wingnuts at Wikileaks, who seem determined to sink Madame Sec's presidential bid.
    http://tinyurl.com/goecnqw

    http://tinyurl.com/jf52sb3

     "gross negligence" meets the standard for criminal prosecution, and Comey spent most of the presser making the case for gross negligence.

    Stated that"Hostile actors gained access"
    ..."possible that hostile actors gained access"

     110 e-mails had classified information at the time the messages were sent -- eight of which were top-secret or higher. The FBI also found "several thousand" work-related e-mails that Hillary had not turned over to State.

    None of the above is gross negligence?, and the DOJ declines prosecution?

    http://tinyurl.com/zbvdggq

    A Navy sailor entered a guilty plea Friday in a classified information mishandling case that critics charge illustrates a double standard between the treatment of low-ranking government employees and top officials like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and ex-CIA Director David Petraeus.

     Clinton has said none of the information on her server was marked classified at the time. (Proven incorrect}

    Still, it's far from obvious that the information Saucier took photos of is more sensitive than information found in Clinton's account.
    However, the Navy says the photos are classified "confidential," which is the lowest tier of protection for classified information and is designated for information that could cause some damage to national security but not "serious" or "exceptionally grave" damage.
    Intelligence agencies claim that Clinton's account contained 65 messages with information considered "Secret" and 22 classified at the "Top Secret" level. Some messages contained data under an even more restrictive "special access program" designation.

    However, Clinton's critics and some former intelligence officials said she should have recognized the sensitivity of the information. They've also noted that about 32,000 messages on Clinton's server were erased after her lawyers deemed them personal.
    "The DOJ is willing to prosecute a former sailor to the full extent of the law for violating the law on classified material, in a situation where there was no purposeful unsecured transmission of classified material,"

    Parent

    You just (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:39:37 AM EST
    can't admit it's over can you? You can desperately spin but I have to tell you you seem to be in denial of the fact that the wingnut welfare brigade has been lying to you repeatedly for over a year now about this exact same thing. So since the wingnut welfare brigade has spent over a year lying to you you're going to back to the same well for information. ROTFLMAO SMH. You'd be better off dealing with your grief that wasting time shopping this kind of garbage.

    Parent
    Lol (none / 0) (#67)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:45:39 AM EST
    You didn't read a thing posted.

    You are in rabid reflexive mode.

    Basically everything the "wingnut welfare brigade" (whatever that is) actually was true.

    Sever was most likely hacked, by hostiles.
    Top secret information, born classified , not retroactively, was sent and received by Madame Secretary.
    Some e mails had classification markings.

    I thought that would have been enough to meet gross negligence standards, but I was always aware of who the evidence was being gathered on, and this result was never unexpected.

    Parent

    Wrong (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:50:56 AM EST
    No proof Clinton's server was "likely hacked", or as to what Comey ACTUALLY said, "possibly hacked".  Pure speclation with no proof whatsoever.

    Elevating the story to more lies, I see.

    Parent

    You don't think so? (none / 0) (#72)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:55:08 AM EST
    Comey said the FBI found no "direct evidence" that anyone had breached Clinton's personal email domain, while adding that the agency isn't able to rule it out.

    "Given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence," Comey said at a press conference Tuesday.

    Comey said the FBI found that malicious actors breached the private email accounts of people who communicated with Clinton regularly from her personal account, and that Clinton's use of a personal email domain "was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent."

    The FBI head added that Clinton used her personal email "extensively" while abroad, and that meant sending and receiving work emails "in the territory of sophisticated adversaries."

    "Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account," Comey said.

    Parent

    Using Comey's logic (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:14:03 PM EST
    And yours, apparently, we can definitively say that since OPM was hacked (including getting employees' and job-seekers' personal emails), and they regularly communicate with people of all agencies,  including the FBI (including those who check their email while overseas), using his logic, the FBI servers "possibly" were hacked, but we have no "direct evidence" that they actually were hacked.

    If there was something to this, she would be charged.  If there was something to the classified email portion, she would be charged.

    I'm still trying to remember when the press conference by Comey was about the long, dragged out investigation into the 22 MILLION missing emails between WH staff and the RNC? (Oh right, that never happened). I mean, all kinds of information passes through the WH, so it's "possible" classified info went through these emails, but we'll never know because they were erased.

    Parent

    No, No, and NO (none / 0) (#92)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:21:52 PM EST
    If there was something to this, she would be charged.  If there was something to the classified email portion, she would be charged.

    If this was a petty officer in a submarine...CHARGED

    or a staff person at the State Department...CHARGED

    This was about power of the privileged class,

    The 1 % live by different rules than the rest of us,
    And the 1% means both Republicans and Democrats

    Parent

    Comey himself (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:43:59 PM EST
    Explained why this is not the same.

    But hey, you wanna keep believing your fantasy talking points....

    Parent

    Care to address the other items (none / 0) (#78)
    by BTAL on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:58:45 AM EST
    Trevor listed that are not "speculative" in any manner?

    Emails classified "at birth".I can't even begin to estimate the number of blogs and posts here at TL that have been completely debunked on this topic.

    Emails found that did contain classification markings.

    That all emails were handed over.  

    That the server (now we know several servers and devices) were secured (The Secret Service protection of the house was the biggest non-sense posted).

    Parent

    What Comey did (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:02:22 PM EST
    Was to decline recommending prosecution,

    At the same time tell the American public that Madame Sec has been baldfaced lying to the American public for the past year.


    Parent

    But (none / 0) (#98)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:31:21 PM EST
    you can't admit you and your conservative travelers have been bald faced lying to everybody can you?

    Parent
    About what? (none / 0) (#118)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    Everything I have posted prior,

    Comey confirmed.

    I had expected if any charges were to be brought, it would be on the gross negligence aspect of the law

    Stored classified information on a unauthorized device ...Check

    Top Secret classified information stored on unauthorized device....Check

    Classified information , born classified , not retroactive, stored on unauthorized device...Check

    Parent

    Comey (none / 0) (#97)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:30:20 PM EST
    did a piss poor job of explaining classification and that is the crux of that problem. And classified "at birth" covers a lot of things including spillage that could have come from multiple sources within the state department. Perhaps they should audit every employees email and see about this kind of thing.

    Parent
    Naw (none / 0) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:25:35 PM EST
    Trevor you're the one in rabid reflexive mode desperately trying to spin a loss as something it never was and never will be. You're moving the goal posts again and again and desperately trying trying trying. Mostly you and the rest of the conservatives and the Republicans are sad. Every post you made here just justifies why the GOP needs to be destroyed at the polls.

    Parent
    You don't (none / 0) (#101)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:34:04 PM EST
    understand what "marked classified is" but of course you think that confusing the subject is going to help you when it's not. Do you realize there are stamping and it seems you are confusing born classified with marked classified and everything else. But of course confusion is what you want. Comey declined to discuss retroactive classification too didn't he?

    Parent
    He also said (5.00 / 2) (#106)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:43:06 PM EST
    That the classified stuff may well have not been marked as classified but smart people "should just know".

    Yeah, well, maybe.  I would think a very strong argument coukd be made that when you are sending and receiving hundreds of emails a day. They might need to be actually, you know, be MARKED as classified so people would not need to "just know"

    Parent

    Have you ever held a (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by BTAL on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:51:49 PM EST
    government security clearance, much less actual classified material?  Based on your comments apparently not.

    In my 20 years carrying a TS/SBI clearance have dealt with tons of the stuff.  Markings are clear and classified content is clear to anyone in such positions of trust.

    Mis-handling classified information (marked or not) is sufficient grounds for revocation of access and clearance.  

    While assigned to the European Command Airborne Command Post we had a Navy Captain (O-6) lose his clearance, receive 4-star letter of admonishment (a career ender) and was forced to retire for describing some elements of our mission to Naval Academy Midshipmen visiting us during their summer internships.  The midshipmen possessed Secret clearances and the discussion occurred on one of our mission aircraft.  Verbal classified information - no markings - but with serious repercussions for the incident.

    So please stop with the internet classified "expertise" smoke you're blowing.

    Parent

    And using your example (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    That admiral didn't face a criminal investigation or charges.

    Thanks for proving our points.

    Parent

    What admiral? (none / 0) (#123)
    by BTAL on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:11:14 PM EST
    Prior to the end result there was a full blown investigation that did include potential criminal (UCMJ) charges.  

    Apologies for not including that tid-bit for you.  So, sorry you've missed the point.

    Parent

    Law enforcement doesn't agree with you (none / 0) (#45)
    by vicndabx on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:15:37 AM EST
    Well.. (none / 0) (#49)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:21:45 AM EST
    once you make a commitment to stumping for the likes of Trump and Ted Cruz, you've already admitted that you don't mind standing on a high hill and emptying a full chamber pot into the wind..

    Parent
    Is this the new (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:18:25 AM EST
    talking point sent out by the wingnut welfare brigade? Do you realize that you have completely lost your mind with this stuff?

    I also know you're very desperate. Whatever. This is your problem and don't project your problems onto me.

    If I were to play your game I could pull up Trump's many problems and ask you why you support him? But I'm a grown up and I know why you do. Why can't you treat others like an adult and act like an adult yourself?

    Parent

    Let me answer you (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:30:14 AM EST
    I support Trump because of his foreign and immigration policy and he won't do anything that will go against my belief in minority rights. He might even reform our crazy drug laws.


    Parent
    HAHAHAHAHA! (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:15:30 PM EST
    Funniest thing I've read all day.

    His "policy"? He won't do anything against your belief in "minority rights"?

    LOL

    Parent

    I think Jim's referring to that minority (none / 0) (#130)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:22:58 PM EST
    that gets up in the middle of the night and takes the sheet with them.

    Parent
    Actually Jim, I have no idea what (none / 0) (#54)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:27:53 AM EST
    "defines gross negligence."

    You might want to ask one of the attorneys who hang out here.  You may then proceed with your argument.

    "then I don't know what does" just doesn't cut it as a convincing argument.  That form may be popular here but it ain't convincing.

    Parent

    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:40:17 AM EST
    I am making no argument and wouldn't ask anyone for their definition. In the case of the supporters of Hillary here their answer proceeds them. But I think Lewis Carroll explains it well.


    `I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.
    Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course
    you don't-- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knockdown argument for you!"'
    `But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice objected.
    `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean-- neither more nor less.'
    `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
    `The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.
    - Lewis Carroll

    Parent
    The site's resident Lewis Carroll scholar.. (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:11:16 PM EST
    discussing how we manipulate the language to alter reality to suit our purposes..

    Like when the Carroll scholar himself told us that Mission Accomplished only referred to a successful aircraft carrier landing and nothing else..

    Parent

    This is the best part (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:19:47 PM EST
    The pretzelification of the email trolls in desperate attempts to salvage some tiny shred of credibility.  Well, except for ppj.  Credibility has not been an issue there for years.

    Here's the bottom line.

    As desperately as Andrea and the MSM will cling to the "damming 15 minutes" there's one thing that will become part of the body politic from it.  No one is being indicted.  For anything.

    In an hour or so Obama and Hillary will step squarely on anything else.

    As Pete Williams, who seems the only sane man on TV today, said moments ago.  This is over.

    Parent

    Your ability to make things up (none / 0) (#168)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 08:06:17 AM EST
    continues to define you.

    And as you do not have any idea as to how the military uses words, I will again attempt to educate you.

    A mission is a specific act. Think of the bombing missions of WWII. Each was a separate act.

    The ship was returning from its mission.

    Mission Accomplished.

    As usual, no charge for the education.


    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#171)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 08:28:01 AM EST
    congratulations on being the only person on the planet in the know enough to correctly interpret Mission Accomplished as only referring to the singular mission of a single ship and not to anything else.

    Since you already jumped down in it with both feet, you might as well dive in head first, right?

    Parent

    Thank you (none / 0) (#200)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 08:46:41 PM EST
    I am always happy to try and educate you on what various phrases mean when used by various groups.

    Parent
    If a panal of judges was scoring (none / 0) (#201)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 07:20:18 AM EST
    you for sheer unbridled chutzpah, you'd get straight 10s across the board.

    Parent
    Actually, Jim, you could have rolled with (none / 0) (#143)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 03:25:12 PM EST
    Comey's characterization of Clinton and Staff's actions as "extremely careless."

    That is gold plated criticism from a gold plated critic.

    No need to reach for more.

    Your real problem is that the alternative to Clinton is Donald Trump.

    Parent

    What (none / 0) (#44)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:12:51 AM EST
    Jim is missing is the reasonable prosecutor standard.  

    Parent
    No I get it (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:24:36 AM EST
    Comey's words are almost an exact definition of what gross negligence is.

    I just think if the person was a military clerk s/he  would have been in jail a long time ago.

    There is also the level of "Caesar's Wife" to consider. Nixon was impeached for less.  Petraeus was rightfully prosecuted for less.

    Comey made a political decision. Perhaps in the hope that the voters will do what he felt he should not. History will judge him.

    Parent

    what "political decision" (none / 0) (#53)
    by CST on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:26:29 AM EST
    did he make?

    He's not exactly a Democrat/Clinton supporter.

    Parent

    You still don't grasp (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:55:20 AM EST
    Trump's appeal?

    Comey is an insider.

    Parent

    You're still (none / 0) (#64)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:41:18 AM EST
    bitter about Watergate I see. No, Nixon did way more and so did Petraues but you just can't leave the old white guy victim syndrome long enough to see the facts.

    Parent
    Nope, not bitter (none / 0) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:01:18 PM EST
    Nixon should have, and did, resign for actions less than Hillary's....after the Republicans showed they would not support him....

    If my actions supporting the rule of law makes me an old white guy pass the hair dye and wheel chair lube.

    Parent

    less than Hillary's (none / 0) (#95)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:25:39 PM EST
    nah, you're not bitter.

    You're just pushing the "Nixon didn't know what his people were doing" defense forty something years after the fact.

    What you are is self-deluding and attempting to drag others into your severely altered state of reality.

    It still hurts after all these years, eh?

    Parent

    My take (none / 0) (#66)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:43:52 AM EST
    is that he who shall not be named should never have been charged.  What ever one thinks about what he did proving a crime in court would have been almost impossible.

    OJ is another example of a problem proving in court what happened.

    Not to mention jury nullification even when there may be some evidence, but not enough to meet the burden.

    Hillary herself said what she did was a mistake.  But the question is not so much did she commit a crime, rather could that be proved in court.  Most reasonable prosecutors, even if they thought she did commit a crime, would not bring charges because in their judgement a conviction would not be likely.

    Parent

    No -she is smart enough to know (none / 0) (#172)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 10:23:12 AM EST
    the limits of what the system will bear and bold enough to go right up to them in pursuit of a goal.

    Gees, Jim, after 25 years you forgot the 'ruthless and relentless' part of the Clinton meme?

    Parent

    dadler, please don't (none / 0) (#38)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 10:43:42 AM EST
    comment here if all you are going to do is spew hate through hyped up accusations against politicians. Your last comment was deleted.

    In the past few days (none / 0) (#69)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 11:50:30 AM EST
    I have seen several posts on web sites claiming if Hillary is not charged there will be several FBI agents leaking embarrassing claims about what the FBI found.

    Wondering what will happen with this, given that Comey seemed to come down very hard on Hillary, her top employees, and DOS?

    Mostly nothing. (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 01:34:33 PM EST
    People are over this story. Leaking something might put some pressure on Comey to resign but since Hillary has bee cleared the vast majority of people are going to ignore it or see it as some type of warfare going in within the FBI.

    Parent
    I know, (none / 0) (#104)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:42:04 PM EST
    first the Republican's report on Benghazi and now the Republican FBI Director's conclusion after a year-long investigation, what is a poor wingnut to do?  Well, there is plenty for them to do--defending Trump's judgment and honesty in the Trump University civil suit. Or, more to their liking, get Judicial Watch to, thrice again, investigate that Vince Foster matter,

    Yep (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 12:45:54 PM EST
    Just reading that all this "legal krap" is now over.  Interesting to see what they come up with now.

    Vince Foster seems likely.

    Parent

    Hillary and O (none / 0) (#140)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 02:57:05 PM EST
    Are raising the roof in Charlotte

    Sounds like a Trump rally.  Or that other guy. What was his name, Barney?

    Still planning my Cuba trip (none / 0) (#149)
    by ragebot on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:00:36 PM EST
    and came across this disturbing news.  Looks like if the president of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, is forced to leave power there may be another Special Period.

    Venezuela (none / 0) (#152)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:07:27 PM EST
    Can no longer support Cuba, they cannot feed their own people

    Parent
    Interesting stats from 538 (none / 0) (#153)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:48:06 PM EST
    The closest 5 swing states if the election were held today are:

    Arizona
    Missouri
    North Carolina
    Georgia
    South Carolina

    Good lord (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 06:53:40 PM EST
    It's going to be a wipe out if Hillary carries SC. None of the other are surprising to me.

    Parent
    MO is a bit surprising to me (none / 0) (#155)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 07:09:24 PM EST
    It's been trending red except for a brief hiccup in 2008 when it was close but red still won.  I practically live n MO.  I'm a little surprised.

    Parent
    They should all be a bit surprising (none / 0) (#161)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 08:39:53 PM EST
    Romney carried all five bewteen 3 and 11 pts and still lost. Today they are all swing states.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#163)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 05, 2016 at 09:06:54 PM EST
    Obama carried NC in 2008. The Big Dawg carried MO in the 90's so I guess that it why that does not surprise me as much. Bill carried Ga in 1992 but SC has not voted for a Dem for president since 1976. So that one is a big time shocker.

    Parent
    In a response to Donald Trump (none / 0) (#169)
    by Nemi on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 08:19:12 AM EST
    whining on Twitter about how "dishonest media" misrepresents him and his intent, re the now infamous star, Nate Silver tweets

    Pretty cool that Israel honored the American frontier spirit by putting a sheriff's badge on their flag!

    On the same subject Dana Schwartz, an employee of Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, writes him an open letter, one Jewish person to another:

    And now, Mr. Kushner, I ask you: What are you going to do about this? Look at those tweets I got again, the ones calling me out for my Jewish last name, insulting my nose, evoking the holocaust, and tell me I'm being too sensitive. Read about the origins of that image and see the type of people it attracted like a flies to human waste and tell me this whole story is just the work of the "dishonest media." Look at that image and tell me, honestly, that you just saw a "Sheriff's Star." I didn't see a sheriff star, Mr. Kushner, and I'm a smart person. After all, I work for your paper.

    Edmund Burke once said, in times that are starting to seem more and more similar: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Well, here I am, and here we are. Both Jewish, both members of the media. And you might choose silence, but I've said my piece.



    Corker says, um ,no. (none / 0) (#178)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 12:22:11 PM EST
    Corker withdraws as VP

    I'm really starting to think it may be my batsh!t senator Tom Cotton.

    Is Cotton the Norman Bates lookalike? (none / 0) (#182)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:06:47 PM EST
    Wow Really? (none / 0) (#183)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:17:54 PM EST
    Sander's as Trump's running mate?

    And maybe Hillary will pick Dick Cheney or Paul Wolfowitz to help her "obliterate" Iran and the Assad regime.

    Seriously. You never noticed before now that Trump's been trying to dog whistle to Sander's supporters for months?

    It's called the ultimate desperation move.

    Insulting the intelligence of everyone involved the way the Sarah Palin pick insulted the intelligence of the PUMAS in 'O8.

    Parent

    You guys need to get on the same (none / 0) (#184)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:29:10 PM EST
    page the way the other team does over at Breitbart.

    One minute you're exultant because 80% of Sanders supporters say they'll vote for Hillary, and with the next breath you're regressing back (for the umpteenth time) to "Sander's and Trump are the same"

    Parent

    It's not about winning elections ? (none / 0) (#196)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 03:13:26 PM EST
    It's about keeping our wives employed?  Seriously?  

    If there is a dictionary definition of political delusion that has to be it.  

    Would you or kdog please explain to me exactly how that works?  Feel free to move to the new open thread or make a dairy or whatever.  I would just love to know how the philosophy of changing the country without winning elections works.

    Parent

    Cotton is eerie (none / 0) (#189)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:19:59 PM EST
    and, yes, he has the definite Norman Bates look.

    I watched part of an interview this a.m. on the CBS morning show ... talks rapid fire, doesn't seem to blink, and kind of seems robotic.  OTOH, the rapid, apparent firing of facts has an initial come on of a smart person.  He reminds me of a version of an I'm-so-right Paul Ryan.  

    What do you think, Howdy?

    Parent

    The love child (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 03:09:31 PM EST
    Of Paul Ryan and Norman Bates

    Parent
    A little reminder (none / 0) (#181)
    by CST on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 12:29:49 PM EST
    About who the primary victims of ISIS are.

    It's worth mentioning that Istanbul is about as safe as Orlando.

    And, the impact of Medina? (none / 0) (#190)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:21:34 PM EST
    I never understood (none / 0) (#202)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 12:36:30 PM EST
    Why people have a problem scrolling down to find an open open thread.

    New comments show up in the "entries with new comments" on the top right of the page.

    I had to take a break from the hearing.  I'm recording it.

    This is hsyterical. (none / 0) (#203)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 12:50:16 PM EST
    What a disaster for the GOP. All the heads that did not explode on Tuesday have to have exploded today.

    DKos (none / 0) (#204)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 12:53:07 PM EST

    Why did Republicans think that going after an experienced prosecutor who they'd publicly said they respect as a man of great integrity was going to go well for them? Comey originally went out of his way, against usual protocol, to give them something to work with in attacking Clinton, and instead of thanking him, Republicans are attacking him and repeatedly inviting him to explain why it would be wrong to prosecute Clinton. It seems they just can't keep themselves from overplaying their hand when it comes to Hillary Clinton.


    Parent
    The reason (none / 0) (#205)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 01:06:45 PM EST
    why they did it is simple. They were either going to have to own up to the fact that they have been lying to everybody or attempt to take down Comey.

    The funniest part is the fact that Comey had to spend the entire time defending Hillary.

    Parent

    Do we have someone new on the VP list? (none / 0) (#206)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 01:28:56 PM EST
    Prob not... the 'optics' of that would send people through the roof. It would be funny though.

    Parent
    Ha (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 01:34:01 PM EST
    You mean Chaffetz for Trump or Comey for Hillary.

    The ranking member just shut it down by pointing out that the three (out if at least 30,000) emails that were "classified" it turns out were in fact not classified and were incorrectly labeled per the State Department.  Comey was unaware of this new information.

    So what are we here again?

    Parent

    I hear airport tarmacs (none / 0) (#208)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 01:43:29 PM EST
    are a great place to discuss secret strategy. Maybe Comey should have found Gowdy at one and told him he was trying to throw him a lifeline.