Fainting and Medical Comparisons

Dr. Jen Gunter at The Hill writes an article, "Yes, Hillary almost fainted: I'm a doctor and it's really OK."

The medical term for fainting is syncope. Syncope is the temporary loss of consciousness and posture, due to a temporary insufficient flow of blood (and hence oxygen) to the brain. If the feeling of faintness and light-headedness and weakness comes but there is no loss of consciousness, the event is called near-syncope.

...The Journal of Geriatric Cardiology published a pretty definitive list of potential syncope causes in this useful review article about older adults.


Pneumonia doesn't make a candidate unfit for office. Neither does fainting. Or being on Coumadin.

Does anyone remember Dick Cheney's medical history? This doctor analyzes it (with source links and a demarcation of fact and his opinion.)

The New York Times reports on his 4th heart attack which occurred during the Florida recount in 2000 (it wasn't diagnosed as such until later.) During his stint as Vice President, The Times reports Cheney had these medical issues:

While vice president, he developed additional problems, and each time he received the latest technology. For example, he had angioplasty to unblock coronary arteries; stents to keep them open; and surgery to repair aneurysms, or ballooning of arteries, behind both knees. A new combination device was implanted: a pacemaker to detect and correct abnormal heart rhythms, and a defibrillator to give a powerful electrical shock to stop potentially fatal ones.

In a 2013 interview with NPR, Cheney said:

I was able to live with chronic heart disease for 35 years and still lead a very active, very normal, some people say abnormal, career, but able to function at a high level in spite of the disease. And that’s because of all the developments that are now available in terms of medicine that have made that possible.

In 2002, then President George W Bush fainted while eating a pretzel, a month after having had skin lesions removed from his face (the two events were not related):

The doctor said the president had complained Saturday and Sunday that he was "a little off his game" and thought he was coming down with a head cold.

"He had not been feeling well the last couple of days," Tubb said, adding that Bush had exercised rigorously Saturday but had a lighter workout Sunday....

The episode is the second medical incident involving the president in about a month. In early December, the White House acknowledged that Bush had several benign skin lesions removed from his face.

In 1992, then President George H.W.Bush fainted at a state dinner in Japan and threw up.

One person who attended the dinner and saw the incident at close range said the President "turned white as a sheet," rolled his head to the left, and was clearly fainting before being helped to the floor. "It all happened very, very fast," said the guest, who refused to be identified by name.

In addressing the Press, his media spokesman said:

"During the dinner tonight at approximately 8:20 P.M.," he said "the President slumped over in his chair, was feeling weak and was helped to the floor by Secret Service agents. The President recovered in a few minutes and remarked to the agents, 'I just wanted to get a little attention.' "

Referring to the President's physician, he also said: "Dr. Lee does not feel there's any special monitoring required. All aspects of the examination indicate that it is a common case of the flu."

A few months earlier, Bush had a thyroid episode with atrial fibrillation:

[A]n undiagnosed thyroid condition caused his heart to begin beating rapidly and uncontrollably, a condition called atrial fibrillation.

Joe Biden has had two brain aneurysms.

Biden's brush with death came two decades ago, just months after he gave up his own campaign for president. Biden, who had suffered headaches for weeks, found himself with a headache so severe that he lay down in a fetal position, then passed out for five hours. Upon awakening, he made it to a hospital, where doctors discovered a ruptured aneurysm -- a condition so severe that a priest said he was called in to administer the last rites.

.. He suffers occasional back pain, as well as chronic sinusitis and severe seasonal allergies dating back to childhood, when asthma was diagnosed. Earlier this year, he underwent surgery to correct the sinus condition, a relatively common and minor procedure.

In 2006, he suffered an episode of atrial fibrillation, or irregular heartbeat. He underwent a stress test -- technically known as a stress echocardiogram -- and doctors concluded that the fibrillation was a lone episode with no underlying heart disease. They chalked it up to Biden's busy lifestyle and lack of exercise. After that episode, the senator began taking aspirin as a blood thinner.

He also takes Zocor to control cholesterol, Claritin for allergies and Flomax to aid urination.

George H.W. Bush is 92 today. Dick Cheney (with his 5 heart attacks, atherosclerosis and transplanted heart) is 75. John McCain is 80. Bernie Sanders is 75. Joe Biden is 73.

Donald Trump is 70 and Hillary is 68.

< Hillary Feels Fine, Recovering from Pneumonia | Wednesday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Unnecessary Secrecy Hurts Worse than Syncope (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Michael Masinter on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 03:12:17 PM EST
    There's no medical issue worthy of discussion here.  But why did she wait until five hours after she became faint to reveal her diagnosis on Friday of pneumonia? Secretary Clinton's penchant for secrecy hurts her campaign far more than does an illness from which I hope she recovers quickly and with no lasting effects.

    In 2004 (5.00 / 4) (#87)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 11:37:58 AM EST
    John Kerry had the exact same thing - walking pneumonia.  This was in February.  Know when he told people / the press?


    So, no, I don't really think 2 days is an inordinate amount of time.


    How old was Kerry (none / 0) (#109)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:08:32 PM EST
    At the time, and what was his past medical history, particularly the last 6 years?

    It's almost like you're trying ... (none / 0) (#111)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:11:05 PM EST
    ... to say something, but can't quite get it out.

    Happens when you have no evidence, huh?


    He was 61 (none / 0) (#151)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 01:20:17 PM EST
    Male (average shorter life expectancy than a woman) and twice wounded in combat  (despite Republicans best efforts to ignore and mock).

    So, your point is....what exactly?


    Unnecessary Secrecy??? (5.00 / 3) (#153)
    by Trickster on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 03:17:28 PM EST
    Since when has instant reporting of private medical issues become the norm? To the best of my knowledge, since never.

    Clinton-only standard #1,000,002.


    When a candidate (none / 0) (#177)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 11:59:55 AM EST
    is caught on candid camera having a medical episode?

    This may not be a new Clinton standard but a 21st Century no privacy standard.  Thank god there were no iphones in FDR's day.


    I agree. I think the tendency to secrecy (none / 0) (#49)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 08:34:36 PM EST
    even when it is not really needed is something that will always be there for better or worse going forward. It has always been thus and she shows no signs of changing it. She must see some advantage in it that does escape me.

    I have to say (5.00 / 4) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:01:50 PM EST
    this election has proven that really transparency is for fools. Clinton released her tax returns and all that happened is it was used to bash her. Trump does not release his tax returns and there are no consequences for him. She released an actual letter from a doctor and Trump released a medical letter he probably wrote himself. At least the press mocked that stupid letter. Trump just makes it up as he goes along and no one questions him.

    What consequences (none / 0) (#55)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:05:01 PM EST
    Are you looking for?

    Trump does not release his tax returns and there are no consequences for him.

    Well, let's see (5.00 / 6) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:14:49 PM EST
    the press could have a countdown like it's been x number of days and Trump has not released his tax returns. He has said he's not going to release them at all ever and what are the consequences for him doing it? He's normalized along with the help of the press and the GOP white nationalism, xenophobia and all kinds of awful stuff. He's not been transparent and even though Hillary has been more transparent that he has she still is the one that gets questioned. I mean even the media admits they are harder on Hillary because they have a "higher standard" for her than for Trump. Geez Louise, the guy is running for leader of the free world. They did the low standards thing before with George W. Bush and what a disaster that turned out to be. He lies the most of any candidate EVER and yet the press never asks him why nobody finds him trustworthy do they?

    Just about every (none / 0) (#60)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:20:11 PM EST
    Newscast I watch do bring up Trump not releasing his taxes. Every one. Even on Fox. Yes.

    Other than that, the final consequence will be up to the voters.

    The press has not let The Donald off the hook on his tax returns. The consequences you want, a decline in his polling numbers, is just not showing up


    Yes (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:27:54 PM EST
    they ask him but then he says he's not going to release them and then they move on. I mean just today he had an interview with CNBC where he called a sitting US senator a racist slur. He said Obama is secretly holding down the interest rate for the election and a bunch of stuff that is completely not factual. Can you imagine if Hillary did that? It would be 24/7 screeching about it. Nobody even calls him on his misinformation in an interview.

    The host of NPR's "Marketplace," (none / 0) (#64)
    by Peter G on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:35:50 PM EST
    their business and economics show, this evening used the word "lies" in describing Trump's comments about Janet Yellen and the Fed's interest rate decisions being politically motivated. So you can't say "nobody" called him on it.

    Complete hogwash (none / 0) (#154)
    by Trickster on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 03:19:50 PM EST
    Unless you never watch newscasts.

    I mean really, what are you about here? Every newscast brings up Trump's tax returns?

    You're REALLY, REALLY saying that? That's hard for me to classify as an accidental inaccuracy, which is the generous way of looking at it.


    "penchant for secrecy" (none / 0) (#180)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:51:00 PM EST
    Nixon's problem as well.  Kind of ironic, given that Hillary was one of John Doar's chief assistants when he hastened Tricky Dick's D.C. exit.

    Doesn't matter (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 03:25:23 PM EST
    This will be played up as Untrustworthiness, lack of transparency, and physically unfit for office. Count on it.

    CNN and Wolfie last night replayed the 'van-stumble' video FORTY times in TEN minutes, so basically a 15-second loop, in case any of us are still unsure whether the press is completely in the tank for Trump.

    Today on NPR Cokie Roberts badically suggested the DNC should vote to request Clinton to step down in favor of Joe Biden.

    Anybody still unclear about which candidate the press wants to win?


    BTD tweeted (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 03:40:10 PM EST
    that it's time for Hillary to go to war on the press in this country and I think he's right. She doesn't have anything to lose. It's not like they are going to treat her any worse than they already are. And trust in the media in this country is at an all time low.

    The (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by FlJoe on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 04:15:35 PM EST
    press has become a malevolent force in this country, seemingly out to destroy it.

    Our white, male, establishment press (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 04:40:49 PM EST
    HATES Clinton.

    And they will happily give us Trump rather than have her win.

    It's terrifying.


    Good grief (none / 0) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:51:40 PM EST
    I watched Blitzer carry her water for at least 30 minutes while he was supposedly interviewing.

    Pence was (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:03:15 PM EST
    an embarrassment to himself and the GOP. I mean if you can't do something as simple as say David Duke is deplorable.

    But even better is the fact that the morons that are Trump supporters are making shirts and announcing to the world that they are deplorable. ROTFLMAO.


    Actually (none / 0) (#52)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 08:48:22 PM EST
    Pence does a admirable job cleaning up after The Donald.
    He is a asset to that ticket, but boy, he sure does have a tough job.
    Cleanup in Aisle 7

    He's only an asset if you (none / 0) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:04:10 PM EST
    compare him to the low standards of Trump. Today he said the Trump Foundation donated 5 million dollars to charity. According to the actual records that is not true. Now is Pence not bright enough to look this stuff up himself or is he just one of those ones that spouts what is fed him?

    I have seen (none / 0) (#56)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:12:37 PM EST
    Him do several lengthy interviews in the last couple of days. Handled himself very well

    Definitely an asset as the VP, and I guess calms the nerves of those establishment republicans still on board


    Right. It's all about the (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:24:16 PM EST
    "optics" not the actual crazed stances he holds.

    I know (none / 0) (#73)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 05:29:09 AM EST
    He attracts "The Deplorables"

    Well Trevor (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:55:15 AM EST
    they are even calling themselves "deplorables" The Pence voters call themselves "the deplorables". Isn't that hysterical?

    Yes, bringing up David Duke (none / 0) (#23)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:58:33 PM EST
    could potentially alienate a Trump's other base-faction who believe it's not good enough to be simply white, your ancestors have to have been from Northern Europe.

    Does BTD tweet, or what? (none / 0) (#57)
    by MKS on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:14:21 PM EST
    Good place for recent scoops.

    Not to shortchange our host (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by MKS on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:59:09 PM EST
    who writes with clarity, detail and cogency imo....Go-to on in-depth review, etc.

    I put her, Markos (with a few curses) and Armando in the same boat in that regard.


    go here (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Peter G on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 10:27:57 PM EST
    yes, but (none / 0) (#67)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 10:12:51 PM EST
    darn twitter really flies by way too fast for me.

    Perhaps but (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:05:15 PM EST
    i think her surrogates should go to war as they did with the stories on the Foundation, but they should highlight the Trump charitable donation deduction scandal, etc.

    She should have an ad out soon with the head of the CIA et al stating that Trump's claims that the briefing experts indicated they were unhappy with Obama are not true.

    Just as NBC was called out on Lauer's performance and has acknowledged the errors, there should be out loud complaints about the press's coverage of her health vs. Trump's shady practices.


    And Trump (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:10:09 PM EST
    has a trial scheduled for child rape that has not even been covered AT ALL.

    It doesn't matter (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:50:49 PM EST
    NOTHING Trump does matters.

    Ironically it's just like he said - he could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Ave and his polls would go up.

    It does. Not. Matter.

    We are witnessing the collapse of our 4th Estate.

    And without that, God help us all.


    We aren't witnessing sh*t... (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 01:15:11 PM EST
    it's already been witnessed...the 4th estate died when the news divisions of the monolith globo-corporations were expected to turn a profit aka sell soap instead of informing the populace in an unbiased strictly factual matter.  Which it appears nobody wanted to watch/read, so we've got the soap opera news channels instead.

    The 4th estate been dead and buried Jack...long time.


    And the child, who was 13 when (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:00:16 PM EST
    this allegedly happened waited 16 years to suit.

    And when Trump was making Hillary sweat.....

    Just tooooooooo convenient for me.


    tooooo convenient.. (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:29:52 PM EST
    I think that's what guys who prey on thirteen-year-olds say to themselves..

    Like your buddy Rush's "tourism" trip to the Dominican Republic... where kids grow up too fast.


    You guys have (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:05:23 PM EST
    never ever complained about the time lapse in a case before. Trump was importing underage models from other countries. Was he running an escort service or a sex slave business Jim?

    Do you still (none / 0) (#36)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:35:46 PM EST
    beat your husband??

    Come on. Don't quibble. Yes or no.

    And what is an underage model?? I see children modeling and working in print and TV media all the time.

    Is that illegal?

    And I haven't seen a 22 year lag before....


    I'm giving you a taste (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:59:55 PM EST
    of your own medicine Jim. You engage in baseless speculation and concern trolling all the time. I guess you think it's okay to ignore fact after fact when it comes to Hillary but not Trump. Gotcha.

    They were undocumented Jim. The very same thing Trump claims to detest or is it okay because the majority of these undocumented people had white skin?

    I'm sure the story was not covered on the alt-right fantasy sites so here's a link Felt like a slave working for Trump


    Ga, show me the baseless (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 10:49:53 PM EST

    I bet you can't.


    Correction - 22 years (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:36:24 PM EST
    22.. (none / 0) (#91)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 12:34:43 PM EST

    was the amount of time you blathered about Jeff Epstein here before you found out Trump was a much bigger Epstein fan than Bill C was..

    Thirteen-year-olds indeed.


    Let's not forget "The Deplorables." (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:15:42 PM EST
    Just a few minutes ago on CNN, GOP VP nominee Mike Pence was twice given the opportunity by Wolf Blitzer to repudiate David Duke's public support for the GOP ticket and denounce that white nationalist for what he is. And twice, Pence refused to do so.

    (And for the record, Donald Trump has never explicitly renounced David Duke's support. In fact, when first confronted by that fat, he repeatedly and falsely denied even knowing who Duke was.)



    First (none / 0) (#19)
    by FlJoe on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:49:46 PM EST
    dividends from Hillary's tactic. The media has a shiny new word to play with, they hopefully be asking this a question lot. "Whats in your basket?"

    Many pundits are calling this a gaffe, despite her using this line before and giving a whole speech about it. The media let it go, but now that they can cast it as a "problem" for Hillary it will be front and center for a few cycles'and Hillary probably wins

    Also the deplorables have quickly(and predictably) hit the bait loudly and proudly reminding everyone exactly who Hillary was referring to.


    What Wolf was doing was trying (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:08:29 PM EST
    to get Pence to give Hillary cover by using the word "deplorable."

    PENCE: "As I've told you the last time I was on, I'm not sure why the media keeps dropping David Duke's name. Donald Trump has denounced David Duke repeatedly. We don't want his support and we don't want the support of people who think like him."

    BLITZER: "You called him a deplorable. You would call him a deplorable?"

    PENCE: "No, I'm not in the name-calling business, Wolf, you know me better than that."

    It didn't work.

    I watched the interview. I can't remember such a hatchet job under the guise of journalism.


    Jim do (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:17:14 PM EST
    you consider David Duke deplorable? Sounds like an easy question to me, use a different adjective if you don't want to echo Hillary. Come on Jim it's time to show your "social liberal" bona fides.

    Trump has denounced Duke (1.00 / 1) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:24:14 PM EST
    so obviously he finds him deplorable.

    As I noted, Hillary Staff Member was trying to get Pence to use the word deplorable,

    Didn't work.

    BTW, do you still beat your wife???


    jim, this beat your wife/husband (none / 0) (#196)
    by fishcamp on Sun Sep 18, 2016 at 08:05:09 AM EST
    meme you keep throwing out  has worn very thin.  Please think up some other ideas that fit your assessment of commenters.  Thank you.

    ... about Trump had supposedly said. Rather, he was asking Pence personally about whether he himself was willing to denounce the white nationalist leader. And Pence declined to do so. Twice. Further, Trump has NOT "denounced David Duke repeatedly." So, Pence is clearly not being honest here.

    Because in fact, Jim, when Trump was confronted by CNN's Jake Tapper in February of this year about the former KKK leader, he channeled the ghost of Sgt. Schultz:

    "Just so you understand, I don't know anything about David Duke, okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know, did he endorse me, or what's going on, because I know nothing about David Duke, I know nothing about white supremacists, and so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about."

    And for the record, that's complete bullschitt because in 2000, when Trump briefly considered running for president under the Reform Party banner, he said the following to the New York Times:

    "The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani. This is not company I wish to keep."

    Meanwhile, Jim, you just keep on channeling Garo Yepremian.


    P.S.: David Duke just praised Mike Pence: (none / 0) (#42)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:55:36 PM EST
    "It's good to see an individual like Pence and others start to reject this absolute controlled media."



    Yes Donald (none / 0) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 11:02:16 PM EST
    we all know that Hillary Staff Member Blitzer was trying to get Pence to use the word "deplorable."

    Why? So that you folks could claim that the use of the word is okay.

    Didn't work,eh??


    As for Duke's endorsement...so what?? Do you actually think anyone outside   the fevered swamps of the Left thinks that means anything?

    Your Lady of the Lies has entered a storm front.

    Buckle your seat belt, Sparky. It's gonna be a rough flight.


    "We all know" (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:00:06 AM EST
    Whenever Jim starts a sentence with that phrase,  grab your hip boots because the bull$hit's gonna get deep.

    And a Trump sorter supporter complaining about lying is seriously funny. Like a Rush fan calling another radio host "fat".

    "Storm front"??? Very telling choice of words,  Jim.  :)


    Yeah "Storm Front".. (none / 0) (#89)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 12:07:41 PM EST
    I thought that too..

    Another one of his favorite sites, no doubt..

    "Northern Europeans" rise up and defend Der Fatherland from the Untermenschen.


    I had almost forgotten ... (none / 0) (#101)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:21:55 PM EST
    ... about his fascination with "Northern" (i.e. white/light-skinned) Europeans and his disdain for those "Eye-tal-yuns", "Span-yurds" and "Pape-ists".

    Sometimes he reveals a bit too much.


    really? (none / 0) (#128)
    by linea on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:15:35 PM EST
    the poles and latvians are in but the greeks are out? LoL

    Apparently (none / 0) (#130)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:17:56 PM EST
    He never defines "Northern" Europeans and he has trouble with geography.  But the Italians, Spaniards and Portugese are clearly out in the cold.

    This is what happens, kids, ... (none / 0) (#132)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:22:11 PM EST
    jimakaPPJ: "we all know that Hillary Staff Member Blitzer was trying to get Pence to use the word 'deplorable.'"

    ... when you've really got nothing of intelligence or substance to say, but you go ahead and say it anyway.


    The plan (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:09:23 PM EST
    seems to be something like this.

    We thought 2000 was bad (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:00:12 PM EST
    Where the press indulged their petty frat-level assinine BS and pissed all over Al Gore. At least then we were in relative peace-time and the consequences were less obvious.

    Their adolescent BS gave us Bush, which gave us Iraq, and STILL they  were too arrogant to learn their lesson.

    Now they can't imagine electing a girl who's smarter than them, and so instead,they're happy to give us an authoritarian nightmare in Trump. Because, Clinton.

    Their shallowness,insecurity and arrogance is truly stunning.

    It's already cost us a war and hundreds of thousands of lives, the destabilization of the whole ME. And now it's about to give us a Putin-loving sociopath.

    But hey.
    They hate Clinton.

    So they're absolutely fine w Trump instead.

    They are FINE w Trump.

    The best thing (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:08:14 PM EST
    to do is to mock them. They are ridiculous and make specious arguments and do stupid speculation.

    Well my dear (none / 0) (#13)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:21:32 PM EST
    I'm glad to mock them same as you.

    But I think it's too late.

    A bunch of white establishment males in the press are scared sh-tless of Clinton and will go in the tank for WHOEVER is on the other ticket.

    That's what it is.

    And if, God willing, she manages to get in, then the next improved version of Trump (aided by Trump TV which is a given) , some new sociopath but with better political skills, will come along, and they will go down to both knees in front of him. Because, Clinton.

    It's a very sad prospect, but that is what we face, thanks to the collapse of our 4th estate.


    I agree with (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:29:34 PM EST
    everything you said.

    I (none / 0) (#9)
    by FlJoe on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:07:44 PM EST
    would not believe it, if I was not witnessing it on a daily basis, terrifying indeed.

    Yes (none / 0) (#74)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 05:35:15 AM EST
    The national press has the same view of Clinton that the general public does, not trustworthy.

    But, they are also actively campaigning against The Donald.
    The Washington Post and NY Times actively campaign for "Never Trump", more than pro Hillary.
    The Post actually scolded the media for focusing on Madame Sec's health, until she inconveniently fainted.

    The press is actually calling this as it is, an election with the 2 most disliked candidates ever.

    They do not trust Madame Sec, and consider The Donald unworthy.


    They don't (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:57:12 AM EST
    ask Donald why nobody likes him do they?

    As they should have (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:06:13 AM EST
    The Post actually scolded the media for focusing on Madame Sec's health, until she inconveniently fainted.

    The fact that she eventually got pneumonia doesn't change the fact that the wingnut and Trump have been floating baseless CTS about non-existent health problems for months.


    According (none / 0) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:45:04 AM EST
    to the Breitbart crowd she's been dying for oh, about 30 years now.

    Hmmm, (none / 0) (#107)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:04:56 PM EST
    Actually, that persistent cough might have been pneumonia all along,

    Just diagnosed late, or the diagnosis just released.

    Although Bill's recent interview with Charlie Rose adds question about this recurring incident


    Also might have been allergies or a sinus (5.00 / 2) (#152)
    by ruffian on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 02:27:43 PM EST
    infection that she ignored...as do a lot of us...until it turned into bronchitis (me)  or pneumonia (her).

    "Might have" - heh (none / 0) (#110)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:09:14 PM EST
    Funny how people think that qualifier makes their baseless claims believable.

    Not to mention the fact that you wingers have been making these silly claims for many months, not since the cough a week ago.

    BTW - "You're starting with your "questions" again?  Would've thought you learned your lesson the first time.


    A few observations here: (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 05:57:35 PM EST
    Hillary Clinton recently endured an 11-hour marathon congressional hearing on Benghazi. In contrast, a bemedaled Gen. David Petraeus fainted at his own congressional hearing on Afghanistan six years ago, which compelled the Senate committee chairman to suspend the proceeding until the next day.

    Now, I could be mistaken, but I don't recall anyone ever questioning Gen. Petraeus's physical fitness for office on the basis of that very public incident, when he was first nominated to become CIA director. So, the current meme being circulated in the media that Mrs. Clinton somehow lacks personal stamina and is not up to the physical rigors of executive office is pretty nonsensical on its face, and is likely sexist in its political impetus as well.

    The average human body is actually 57-60% water, and people are prone to dehydration if they fail to maintain their fluid intake at an acceptable level. It's not an uncommon occurrence, and none of us are immune to its effects. That's why hydration is so vitally important to our maintenance of optimum health.

    As far as pneumonia is concerned, there are several different types. Some pneumococcal infections are viral in origin, while others are caused by bacteria. Some are communicable and contagious, and some aren't so much. Some infections are completely debilitating and life-threatening, while others are so mild as to go unnoticed for some period of time by the afflicted.

    And that's the case here with Mrs. Clinton. Per the reports, if you can read past the media's manufactured hysterics, she's been diagnosed with a mild form of the illness that's commonly known as "walking pneumonia," which is caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae or Mycoplasma pneumonia bacteria. Because the infection is often unaccompanied by fever or other such common symptoms, it's often mistaken initially for a common cold and nothing more.

    While walking pneumonia is spread through close contact, its active period of contagion following initial infection is less than 10 days. When diagnosed, it's treated with prescriptive antibiotics such as amoxicillin, rest and plenty of fluids.

    As both an asthmatic and someone with a partially impaired immune system due to polycythemia vera, I'm more prone to infection by Streptococcus or Mycoplasma bacteria than are most people, and I have to maintain an active awareness of any symptomatic changes in my body.

    For me, while such infections can be a chronic nuisance, I can still function in my daily routines, so long as I pace myself accordingly, take care to not overdo things, rehydrate regularly (not a problem when living in a place with an average 70% humidity), and make sure that I get adequate rest in the evenings.

    So, I wish the handwringing media would please get a grip on reality here, and not overstate the story for whatever their reason. If they insist on continuing, then it's up to sites such as TL to push back hard. And IMHO, a pretty good place to start would be telling the self-promoting David Axelrod to go fck himself.


    Geez-us Donald what is your point? (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:35:42 PM EST
    Seriously what is your point?

    Clinton was diagnosed Friday and kept it a secret.

    She was witnessed and caught on tape stumbling/nearly falling while trying to get into her van after cutting short an appearance Sunday. CNN ran that clip FORTY times in TEN minutes.

    No disrespect but this is not about how YOU feel or deal with your asthma or other health issues, no matter how related you feel they  may be.
    No matter how accurate your details are.


    This is about Clinton falling right into the trap of HEALTH PROBLEMS Trump has been hyping for weeks.

    Falling into the trap set by the press of SECRETIVENESS by not telling anyone.

    Looking not only untrustworthy but un-fit physically for the Presidency.

    I've had pneumonia and I know how it feels, and I'm sure your reports on your own health issues are accurate.


    Given our press and how they operate, the story will be :
    CLinton looks weak, unfit, secretive, untrustworthy.
    What else is she hiding?

    And so on.

    She was an idiot for not reporting this on Friday, and yes it is a hypocritical double standard that she should have to. But she does. Because our press is failing.

    And that is the way it is, and this was a bad own goal, just like the moronic "half" Deplorable remark was an own goal. Not sure how many more she can take, given the polls.

    Deal with it.


    Well, the emerging (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:58:17 PM EST
    strategy seems to be painting the press as a bunch of bozos who are completely incapable of vetting Trump. They've failed to do it for over a year now.

    Your bedwetting is duly noted. (none / 0) (#28)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:10:31 PM EST
    Here's the Clinton campaign website. Why don't you contact them, and demand that they also release the results of her latest pap smear?

    Honestly, smott, please grow a pair.


    Honestly Donald chill (none / 0) (#39)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:40:16 PM EST
    You evidently think concealing a pneumonia dx in this press environment and given the ongoing Clinton narrative of secrecy was just fine.

    I think it was a mistake on several fronts.

    We differ.



    Geez, it was WALKING pneumonia. (none / 0) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 11:37:28 AM EST
    My point here, which seems to have flown right over your head, is that there's absolutely no reason to blow this matter out of proportion as you are doing here, when walking pneumonia is a fairly common and easily treated malady.

    You're the one who's making a great big deal out of this, as though Mrs. Clinton had failed to disclose that she was suffering from typhoid or cholera. You and the other liberal handwringers out there really need to stop playing the hallelujah chorus to the GOP and media on this issue.



    In my opinion, Hillary Clinton had (5.00 / 7) (#20)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 06:50:05 PM EST
    absolutely no obligation on Friday to announce to the world that her physician told her she has pneumonia.

    You're right (none / 0) (#40)
    by smott on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:43:22 PM EST
    In a normal world with a responsible press,Moshe had no obligation at all.

    But we are in a different world, where Clinton has been painted as Secretive and Untrustworthy.

    She HAD to get out ahead of this.
    She didn't.
    Now CNN has her falling on her ass on an endless loop.

    Still think she should have kept it a secret?


    You did not ask me but... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by vml68 on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 08:03:55 PM EST
    Yes, I don't think there was anything wrong with her not broadcasting it to the world.
    Just like we don't need to know if she got a stomach bug and got diarrhea or if she is constipated or if she got a paper cut or if she stubbed her toe.
    Now, if she had a stroke or was diagnosed with cancer, then she absolutely has an obligation to let us know, asap.

    As for the press, do you really think they would have behaved any better had she told them on Friday? They still would have blown it out of proportion. The only difference would have been, we would have had two extra days of non-stop coverage of her "medical crisis" and all the ensuing speculation of who would takeover from her as the Democratic candidate!


    If she didn't there would be more speculation (none / 0) (#44)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 08:02:18 PM EST
    that she had something worse

    If she had not left the 9/11 service early (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by vml68 on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 08:11:06 PM EST
    and stumbled while getting into the van, no one would be speculating because there would have been nothing to speculate about.

    So, there was no reason for her to share on Friday. But on Sunday, with all the ghouls in the press having a field day, she was right to disclose it.


    And who hasn't (none / 0) (#148)
    by Nemi on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 11:45:03 AM EST
    I for one sure have, experienced publicly getting dizzy and near swooning in hot weather. Unpleasant, but not all that abnormal. But as a non-public person I had the luxury of being able -- allowed! -- to quite privately sit down, put my head between my knees and wait for someone to fetch me some Gatorade. After having 'downed' that I soon felt perfectly fine again. That seems to be exactly what happened to Hillary Clinton on Sunday. Once inside the car, she had something to drink, was fine, and immediately started making phone calls.

    If only they hadn't brought up the pneumonia! No need nor obligation to. How I wish they hadn't!


    Hillary kicked but* (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by MKS on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:49:39 PM EST
    in her Anderson Cooper interview.

    He tried to grill her about transparency but she said she is very transparent, having released 40 years of tax returns and detailed medical info--unlike you know who.

    Total (5.00 / 3) (#85)
    by FlJoe on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 10:15:04 AM EST
    exercise in false equivalency from CNN "What are they hiding"
    The 2016 election is setting new lows for presidential transparency in the modern era.
    as if releasing decades of tax returns is equal to releasing zero, as if releasing the same health records as the vast majority of previous candidates is equal to the joke of a letter from Trumps MD.

    The real fact is the Hillary is the most vetted candidate in history(by a long shot) just by the sheer volume of disclosures and the huge amount of time and resources that have been invested in investigating her. Despite all this having uncovered nothing but garden variety political "bread crumb sins" these so called journalists still insist she must be hiding something.

    People this is some evil sht that is going to destroy this country.

    That has to be the laziest headline ever (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 02:18:45 PM EST
    They are a news agency - I would think they would be ashamed to say they can't find the truth. But that is what happens when your 'reporting' consists of waiting for press releases and then quoting people asking questions, instead of going out and finding out real information. Stenography, as I believe Colbert called it.

    It would be a joke if it did not have serious consequences.


    Apologies (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by Nemi on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 06:50:09 AM EST
    if this has already been posted (it can be hard to follow a thread without the 'New Comment'-alert) but Paul Krugman has yet another good post up. He seems to have reached the stage of enough is enough. Good for him!

    And I don't see how the huffing and puffing about the foundation -- which "raised questions", but where the media were completely unwilling to accept the answers they found -- fits into this at all.

    No, it's something special about Clinton Rules. I don't really understand it. But it has the feeling of a high school clique bullying a nerdy classmate because it's the cool thing to do.

    And as I feared, it looks as if people who cried wolf about non-scandals are now engaged in an all-out effort to dig up or invent dirt to justify their previous Clinton hostility.

    Hard to believe that such pettiness could have horrifying consequences. But I am very scared.

    I only wish he wasn't so reluctant to also adress the inherent sexism.

    Re the disappearance of 22 million Bush-White House emails, this is a great, although also sad and maddening, read: The George W. Bush White House 'Lost' 22 Million Emails.

    The question now (2.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:18:11 PM EST
    is not that she hid her health condition.

    The question is why did she lie?

    And we all know the answer.

    She lied because she did not want the public to know she had a very common disease.

    And then her staff lied again when she collapsed.'

    She cannot be trusted.

    Oh my God! (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 02:41:15 PM EST
    a very common disease!

    You mean, if the public found out the awful, incomprehensible truth, they might decide to vote for Trump (if they can pry him away from whatever Girl Scout Troop he's currently stalking..)

    Ballplayers used to be admired for persevering with pain, but now you seem to think the public will have a political epiphany when they find out Hillary isn't some Marvel Comics heroine.


    The question now (1.00 / 1) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:15:45 PM EST
    is not that she hid her health condition.

    The question is why did she lie?

    And we all know the answer.

    She lied because she did not want the public to know she had a very common disease.

    And then her staff lied again when she collapsed.'

    She cannot be trusted.

    Oh, good lord (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 07:20:09 PM EST
    Now that she's not dying you have to come up with something else.

    Should she tell you when she started menopause? Should she tell you when she goes to the bathroom? Do you want to monitor what she eats everyday? Do you want to personally give her a pap smear or a breast examination? It sure sounds like you do.


    She did not lie (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by MKS on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 09:16:04 PM EST
    Quote the lie, Jim.

    You can't, can you?


    She lied about (1.00 / 2) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 09:12:29 AM EST

    She lied about her emails.

    She has made numerous other lies earlier.

    But these two will do.


    No. Jim, quote the supposed lie (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by MKS on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 02:10:40 PM EST
    Not just generalizations....let us see the actual representation made by Hillary that you say were false.

    Can you do that?


    Ask you shall receive (1.00 / 1) (#123)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:01:51 PM EST

    And here

    And here

    And as late as last Friday she lied about her health.

    BTW -How'd you like Trump's detailed plan on childcare and elderly care??? As a Social Liberal I think it was Grrrreat! (Visualize Tony the Tiger.)


    No - she didn't (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:07:46 PM EST
    And as late as last Friday she lied about her health.

    The only one lying about that is YOU, which is why you try to change the subject and you can't quote her "lie".

    But if you're suddenly against lying, you're going to have to switch candidates, because your boy is the King of Liars.  No one else even comes close to Donald.



    No lies (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by MKS on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 09:31:04 PM EST
    quoted regarding her health or Benghazi or even emails.

    The email quote was that she never sent or received any emails marked classified.   That is a true statement.  Three (out of 30,000) had a "c" in the margin of the body of the email chain.  That is not a proper marking for classified documents.  And two of the three were not actually classified at all--any suggestion to the contrary was in error.

    The other "lies' are ordinary mis-statements--as in she thought she was named after  Sir Edmund Hillary.  Not a lie.   Just what she had been told or remembered.  But a common complaint from the far right--where you hang out apparently.    

    Now, the lie about her health.  Please quote the lie verbatim.  Or are you just making it up.


    UN Speech (1.00 / 1) (#140)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 04:43:38 AM EST
    First, when I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department,
    because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two.

    13 devices

    I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work-related, which totalled roughly 55,000 printed pages, even though I knew that the State Department already had the vast majority of them.

    FBI found 17k more  e mails, State Dept is now reviewing and will be releasing them prior to the election

    CLINTON: I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I'm certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.

    Proven false


    Misleading and already answered (5.00 / 5) (#143)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:07:33 AM EST
    Devices.  Are you seriously saying Hillary carried 13 devices with her?  Really?

    One device at a time.  Old one discarded, new one activated.  What is so hard about that?

    Emails.  She made a good faith effort to turn over all work related emails.  How many are actually new as opposed to duplicates is not yet determined.

    Classified emails.  Only three had the "c" in the margin.   The rest were retroactively classified.


    I thought it had been explained (5.00 / 4) (#144)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 08:05:35 AM EST
    that the "c" in the margin meant "confidential" but not "classified."  If the message was "classified" it would have a running header saying so, not just a "c" in the margin. Is that not correct? If it is correct, then none of the emails in question turned out to contain classified information.

    Shunning anyone?? (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:54:43 PM EST
    Why expend all this energy giving someone a platform to engage in more falsehoods. We could all better spend this time phonebanking for our candidate. And I am not directing this at you, Peter, just found a convenient place after reading all this head banging to say why be the audience?

    There were (3.00 / 2) (#157)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 06:04:59 PM EST
    Hundreds of classified e mails, and they were not retroactively classified.
    The information on them was classified at the time it was sent...
    AND NEVER should have been on Madame Sec's private server
    But Comey reported that, of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 individual emails contained classified information, and three of them bore markings signifying their classification status. (Information can still be classified even if it does not have a label.) Eight email threads contained top-secret information, the highest level of classification, 36 contained secret information, and the remaining eight contained confidential information.

    About 2,000 emails have been retroactively classified, or up-classified, meaning the information was not classified when it was emailed, but it is now.

    Did you (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 12:19:00 PM EST
    even read the FBI notes? They absolute validate what Hillary has been saying.
    Page 22: The FBI interviewed multiple officials who authored and/or contributed to e-mails, the content of which has since been determined to contain classified information. USG employees responsible for initiating classified e-mail chains include State Civil Service employees, Foreign Service employees, Senior Executive Service employees, Presidential employees, and non-State elected officials.
     Quite a cast of co-conspirators on this "crime". The FBI even points out that one of the chains originated in the DoD, gasp.  They also point out that many(most or all?) of these classified emails originated from technocrats in the op-center whose job it was to process information both unclassified and classified and pass it on as they saw fit.(ie. they were the professionals who were tasked to determine how the information was to be distributed)

    Trevor and his (none / 0) (#179)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 01:55:29 PM EST
    fascist morally bankrupt fellow travelers will never tell the truth about all this. They are too invested in the "BIG LIE" to let it go.

    He's probably warming up the gas chambers as we blog.


    The markings (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:02:56 PM EST
    on the three were in the body of the letter and it was a C for confidential. I know you are going to continue to shop false information. Classified information is supposed to be in the header of the email not the body of the email. Comey even walked back his statement about the three emails after seeing them.

    And even if you believe what you are saying the fault is on the sender not on Hillary. The person who sent the email to her was to decide whether the information was classified or not and whether it should even be in an email. They are NOW saying they were classified but at the time no one considered them classified. The person sending the email was following state department protocol and these were long time state department employees.

    PS the one you're screaming about being highly classified has made it out into the media and it's an email discussing a NYT article about drones.

    However you've never been one for the facts so nothing surprises us on that account.


    Whatever (none / 0) (#160)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:08:58 PM EST
    Just correcting the record.

    Although many TL readers prefer to keep their blinders on.

    The markings were on the  email, Madame Sec said she didn't recognize them for what they actually were. OUCH!

    And mentioning possible drone strikes and locations, is common knowledge, or should have been that is also classified. Madame Sec had no clue.  OUCH!!

    TL, the land of Hear no Evil, See no Evil, Speak no Evil.....about Madame Sec


    Thr truth hurts, huh? (none / 0) (#161)
    by Yman on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:50:11 PM EST
    The markings were on the  email, Madame Sec said she didn't recognize them for what they actually were. OUCH!

    "Ouch"?  Are you in pain from all that straining?  That would be the only explanation, given that even Come himself had to walk back his claim that you were pushing and that even Comey was forced to acknowledge were improperly marked and that it was a reasonable inference that the absence of a header would lead an expert in classified materials to believe that the three emails in question were not classified.

    Save your crocodile tears and feigned pain for someone who actually needs it, ...

    ... like yourself.


    already "classified" information (none / 0) (#168)
    by ding7777 on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:31:38 AM EST
    can be only be transmitted on classified systems.

    Our government believes information relating to published newspaper articles (think NYT drone expose) should only be discussed on classified system.  Why would you classify a newspaper article?


    Finally (none / 0) (#169)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 05:18:08 AM EST
    Someone gets it!!

    can be only be transmitted on classified systems.

    That was the whole problem here. Classified information, which should have been sent only on classified systems, was placed in e mails, against all government regulation.

    given that even Come himself had to walk back his claim

    2 of the classified markings may have been on the emails inadvertandly, but that doesn't detract from the fact that Madam Sec had no clue what they represented.
    (Actually, I believe Madame Sec does know what the "c" represented, but didn't want to admit that to the FBI. But she also didn't expect the FBI to release all that information, portraying Madame Sec as being ignorant of the classification system.)


    Sadly, it's not you (none / 0) (#174)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:32:56 AM EST
    But you should tell someone who cares what you "think".  I have an Uncle who "thinks" that the moon landing was faked.

    So you are basically (none / 0) (#176)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:19:33 AM EST
    saying that someone in the state department deliberately took information off of a classified system, put it in an email and sent it to Hillary? Remember she was not the originator in any of these emails.

    Yup (none / 0) (#181)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:51:47 PM EST
    You finally got it!!

    But she should be held (none / 0) (#183)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:06:50 PM EST
    responsible for what someone else did too?

    As (none / 0) (#184)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:14:49 PM EST
    Madame Sec, she should have known the material was classified, despite no headers on them.

    The material regarding drone strikes especially.

    And there remains the thought that it was encouraged to write the info on e mail, as Madame Sec did not like using the SCIF ( I believe it is called)

    There was 1 e mail where she wrote, put it in e mail, when a subordinate specifically stated the info requested was classified. It was time sensitive as it had to do with a upcoming meeting with a diplomat, but the FBI report did not expand their investigation as to why so much classified info was sent via e mail, they handed it off back to the State Department to address.


    Trevor (none / 0) (#185)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:13:46 PM EST
    it ended with her. She was the last person. The only ones that she forwarded were the ones that were erroneously classified. You really are showing your ignorance on this subject time and again. Career people in the state department made the decision to send that information to her and did not consider it classified at that time, people who have been at state for decades and have been sending that type of information over unsecured sources for decades but you and your bizarre misinformation has gotten this wrong time and again. Seriously get your head out of the White Nationalist Media and read the FBI report that details all this information.

    oh, no, never mind. You'd rather be lighting up the gas chambers.


    Incorrecto (none / 0) (#186)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:20:27 PM EST
    She replied and forwarded many of these on to others.

    They did not end with Madame Sec. Many of these she had questions or comments to.


    You still don't get it (none / 0) (#187)
    by ding7777 on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:14:35 AM EST
    It is very simple: information that is on a classified system cannot be transmitted to an unclassified system.

    In other words, information that was sent to Hillary's email was not on a classified system when it was sent.

    The "birther" of these documents did not deem them to be classified and obviously Hillary agreed. And no one knows if a future bureaucratic turf war will reclassify after the fact.

    Knowing or not knowing what the lower-case "c" means in the body of a document without classification headers is beyond silly


    You don't get it (none / 0) (#188)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:23:34 AM EST
    Do you.?
    Someone reads a cable at a SCIF. They e mail Madame Sec about the content of the cable.

    The FBI declined (why, I do not know) to investigate further why these e mails containing classified information were sent by the originators. They left that to the State Department , basically the culture at the State Department needs a total revamping.

    But it is very simple to place classified information on a e mail. Not a difficult concept.

    You are in a meeting where classified information is discussed, you send off a e mail to Madame Sec mentioning the content of that meeting, Bingo, you just sent a e mail with classified information?

    Knowing what the c means is paramount to a State Department job, it identifies the level of classification of that document.

    Madame Sec should have known that, if she actually attended her introductory briefing sessions regarding classified information.


    What is known (none / 0) (#189)
    by ding7777 on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:54:09 AM EST
     is that 7 of the 8 "top secret" emails related to drones - including the NYT published articles regarding the CIA drone operation.

    Discussing the NYT story is not putting National Security at risk then, now or in the future regardless of turf war classifications.

    Your insistence on malfeasance (SCIFs? Classified meetings?) is as silly as the "c"


    trying to follow this (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by mm on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 08:51:44 AM EST
    This whole argument is existentially absurd.

    It started out where they were trying to show how Secretary "lied" about something.

    They are now reduced to the tedious tendentious argument about sh*t being sent to her that has since been retroactively classified.

    We are all supposed to forget that the FBI has gone through all this is painstaking detail and interviewed the career SD professionals who generated these emails.

    "During FBI interviews State employees explained the context for why classified material was sent and provided reasons to explain why they did not believe information in the emails was classified"

    "When interviewed by the FBI, authors of the emails stated that they used their best judgement in drafting the messages and that it was common practice at State to carefully word emails on UNCLASSIFIED networks so as to avoid sensitive details or "talk around" classified information."

    What all this crap has to do with proving Secretary Clinton lied about anything is beyond me and is clearly utter bullroar.


    Ironically (none / 0) (#191)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 09:17:15 AM EST
    The FBI mentions the Drone program in their released notes. OMG doesn't that make them guilty of publicly disclosing top secret info? Comey, lock him up!

    No (none / 0) (#193)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:44:59 PM EST
    The nature of the classified emails were not revealed, though a number of them dealt with planning of drone strikes and their aftermath.

    Not a newspaper article, although you like to claim so


    So newspapers haven't written ... (none / 0) (#194)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 07:46:00 AM EST
    ... articles about the planning of drone strikes and their aftermath?

    They'll be shocked to learn that.


    Have you ever heard (none / 0) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 10:05:25 PM EST
    of the lie of omission?

    Letting people think something is not true when you know the truth is a lie.

    Ask you priest, minister or preacher.

    She said that Benghazi was caused by a internet video.

    And she had sent emails telling the truth.

    There are many others. e.g.

    "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

    -Hillary Clinton, speech at George Washington University, March 17, 2008


    As a reporter who visited Bosnia soon after the December 1995 Dayton Peace agreement, I can attest that the physical risks were minimal during this period, particularly at a heavily fortified U.S. Air Force base, such as Tuzla. Contrary to the claims of Hillary Clinton and former Army secretary Togo West, Bosnia was not "too dangerous" a place for President Clinton to visit in early 1996. In fact, the first Clinton to visit the Tuzla Air Force base was not Hillary, but Bill, on Jan. 13, 1996.

    Had Hillary Clinton's plane come "under sniper fire" in March 1996, we would certainly have heard about it long before now. Numerous reporters, including The Washington Post's John Pomfret, covered her trip. A review of nearly 100 news accounts of her visit shows that not a single newspaper or television station reported any security threat to the first lady. "As a former AP wire service hack, I can safely say that it would have been in my lead had anything like that happened," said Pomfret.


    So try and avoid the fact that many on her staff have been sick and she may have given others pneumonia, especially those near her during the parade, she has put out the claim that her bacterial pneumonia isn't contagious.

    That's not what the facts are:

    Many contagious pneumonias have names, such as bacterial pneumonia......They are all potentially contagious


    She is the Queen of Lies.


    She never said Benghazi (5.00 / 2) (#173)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:22:39 AM EST
    was caused by the  video.  Quote her verbatim where she did so if you disagree.  Hint:  you are going to get stuck here.

    Sniper fire.  Reagan told whoppers worse than that on a routine basis and everyone thought it was cute.  She thought it was dangerous when it was not.  So what?

    Hillary's doctor said her pneumonia was not contagious.  How has Hillary lied here?

    You got nothing here, Jimbo.


    So says the King of Lies (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:36:13 AM EST
    Sorry, Jim.  You can't point to an actual lie and you got called on your own lie.

    Must be hard being caught red-handed ....

    ... again.

    BTW - Want to compare your candidate's lies to hers?  I can understand why you wouldn't want to, given that Trump beats everyone else by a mile.  Funny how you would falsely label her the "Queen of Lies" while worshiping at the feet of the King of Lies.


    The Queen of Liars.. (none / 0) (#170)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 05:32:25 AM EST
    can you name one Democrat you think is honest, Jim?

    I know you can't do it. The tiny little Rush-Hannity-Coulter-Mark Levin running riot in your brain would scream bloody murder if you did..

    It really makes no sense whatsoever that she would Knowingly lie about something that could be so easily fact-checked by the army of folks that fact-checked everything any Clinton says at any time..

    I mean, it's not as if she were a blogger who claims to be a social liberal but who posts pictures of Uncle Sam with a gun marked "liberalism" in his mouth -- someone who had all the time in the world to think about it before he posted that picture..

    But then, maybe the secret is that it takes a liar to spot a liar, and that's why you're privy to the inside information that's obvious only to you.


    Even (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by FlJoe on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 08:38:41 AM EST
    when giving a(half-baked)policy Trump cannot stop telling bald face lies, from K Drum
    POSTSCRIPT: Can I gripe about something else as long as we're on the subject? Thanks. Here's the New York Times:

    But in selling his case, Mr. Trump stretched the truth, saying that his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, has no such plan of her own and "never will."

    The Washington Post doesn't even mention this, and needless to say, neither does Ivanka Trump's bit of puffery in the Journal. So props to the Times. But seriously: stretched the truth? As Trump knows perfectly well, Hillary Clinton has been pressing for better child-care and family leave policies for decades, and her current proposal has been on her website for months. It's far more extensive, more generous, and better thought out than Trump's.

    This is why Trump feels like he can simply say anything he wants, no matter how ridiculous. The obvious way to describe Trump's statement is to call it a lie. That's what it is. Instead, it either goes unmentioned or, at best, gets tiptoed around inaccurately. In what way, after all, did Trump "stretch the truth"? That implies there's some kernel of truth to what Trump said, but he exaggerated it. But that's not what he did. He just lied.

    You were talking about her health (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:24:58 PM EST
    ... when you claimed she lied.  But now that you've been called out for your lying, you try to change the subject.

    Busted again, huh, Jim?

    Heh, heh, heh ...


    Yes yes (none / 0) (#88)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 12:02:06 PM EST
    she's lied about everything from the moment she was born.

    Hey Jim, as a guy who's stated outright on his blog that Obama hates and wants America punished, I hope you don't mind if we discount everything you say until you get your mental health issues a little more under control.

    Nothing personal.


    It is always personal (none / 0) (#121)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:50:23 PM EST
    with you jondee.

    Obama believes that the country is a colonial power and that it deserves to be taken down a notch and is always wrong.

    Same as you.


    And you believe it should be (none / 0) (#133)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:23:29 PM EST
    ethnically cleansed so that you and your first cousin can live happily ever after back in God's Lil Acre away from all the darkies, meskins, and Jews.

    Vive le difference.


    Pure John Birch Society paranoia.. (none / 0) (#171)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 05:48:18 AM EST
    in a nutshell..

    And completely unoriginal at that: from the weasely little one, D'Souza's lips to a vacant room which once was a brain..

    The President who isn't simply unfit or incompetent, but who consciously wants to undermine the best interests of the nation and make the citizenry suffer; an enemy, in other words..

    And what do great white patriots do when confronted by the enemy? (and these as*holes think they should be allowed to have guns..)


    The only "lie" here is yours (none / 0) (#80)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:09:22 AM EST
    Luckily with you,  the issue of "trust" is never even on the table.

    Why wasn't her chronic fainting problem (1.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Redbrow on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 02:40:43 PM EST
    Listed in her medical release?

    Both she and Bill have confirmed it happens frequently yet their is no mention in her meical history?

    Hillary and her sycophants are always claiming she has released a very thorough medical record.

    It has now been proven to be woefully incomplete.

    What else are they hiding?

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 03:06:24 PM EST

    'Frequently' Bill's (none / 0) (#99)
    by Redbrow on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 04:20:06 PM EST
    Exact word that he let slip out in the unedited/censored ABC interview yesterday.

    Hillary said "a few times" but indicated her memory was fuzzy.


    "Chronic" - "Frequent" - heh (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:35:05 PM EST
    And what did he say when being more specific about this?  He said "Rarely, but on more than one ocassion, over the least many, many years, this sort of thing's happened to her, when she just got severely dehydrated."

    Glad to help you out with his actual quote, so you aren't misleading anyone.  Wouldn't want anyone to get the idea that it's intentional, now, would we?


    Exactly: (none / 0) (#149)
    by Nemi on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 11:52:11 AM EST
    "When she just got severely dehydrated." That seems to have been the problem, something that even worries her staff: They can't make her drink enough water, which is especially challenging in warm, humid weather. Maybe she could use the incident to not only be more observant herself of making sure she gets enough fluid, but also as a reminder, a warning to others about how important it is.

    BTW - He immediately corrected his use (5.00 / 4) (#104)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:37:22 PM EST
    .. of the word "frequently:

    "... because frequently -- well not frequently, rarely -- but on more than one occasion, over the last many, many years, the same sort of thing happened to her when she got severely dehydrated."

    Funny how you forgot that.


    Exactly (1.00 / 2) (#112)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:12:00 PM EST
    The minute he said he knew he screwed up.

    Doesn't mean it didn't happen frequently, he knew he had to clean that up right away


    Did he? (none / 0) (#116)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:18:57 PM EST
    It's almost like you think you can read his mind.  Or was he just clarifying a word that he knew the wingnuts would seize on to push their silly CTs.

    Ohhhhh ...

    ... look who I'm talking to.


    Well (1.00 / 2) (#118)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:36:22 PM EST
    Why would he say frequently if it only happened once before.
    He would have said , it happened once before.

    Just saying


    Because he never said "once" (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:47:34 PM EST
    In fact, he said "not frequently, rarely -- but on more than one occasion,".

    No one said "once" ... except you.  I guess straw arguments can work with people who don't have actual facts, evidence or reading skills, but not here.


    Actually (2.33 / 3) (#122)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:52:36 PM EST
    He said frequently, then realized he stepped in it.

    Reading - it's not for everyone (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:02:41 PM EST
    I already said that when I posted the full quote above.

    What he never said - what no one ever said except you forming your typical strawman argument - is "once".

    Happy to help you out anytime you're struggling.


    Redbrew = worst.. troll.. evah. (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by desertswine on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:47:19 PM EST
    i didnt read anything (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by linea on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:19:49 PM EST
    Redbrew posted that i would call trolling.
    or is "troll" just a generic slur here?

    Redbrow's comment #96 (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Peter G on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:44:24 PM EST
    for example. (It's "Redbrow," not Redbrew, by the way.)

    double bind (1.00 / 1) (#106)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 06:47:22 PM EST
    Hillary told Anderson Cooper that she didn't lose consciousness on Sunday as she was leaving the 9/11 memorial

    that's good - when you're running for president, you need to project strength & stamina

    & that's very bad - if she did not, by definition, suffer an episode of syncope, or fainting ("loss of consciousness resulting from insufficient blood flow to the brain," per Webster's), then fainting can't explain what the video shows: jerky head movement, rigidity & paralysis of the legs, spastic movements of the shoulders & arms after her body is pulled away from the bollard against which she has been propped up & held in position by an aide while awaiting transport

    i am glad Hillary is feeling better & hope she can carry on, all the way to the White House

    i think our world would be a better & far less chaotic place today if she had been nominated & elected 8 years ago

    but what we have now is a real-life tragedy ("a . . . conflict between the protagonist and a superior force [e.g., destiny] . . . having a sorrowful or disastrous conclusion that elicits pity or terror," again per Webster's)


    Not sure what you're trying to say (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:15:49 PM EST
    But your description was good for a full minute of laughter.

    really, Cream City? (2.50 / 2) (#163)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 08:22:57 PM EST
    troll rating?



    No, it does not have to be very bad. (none / 0) (#164)
    by vml68 on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 09:43:24 PM EST
    & that's very bad
    - if she did not, by definition, suffer an episode of syncope, or fainting ("loss of consciousness resulting from insufficient blood flow to the brain," per Webster's), then fainting can't explain what the video shows: jerky head movement, rigidity & paralysis of the legs, spastic movements of the shoulders & arms after her body is pulled away from the bollard against which she has been propped up & held in position by an aide while awaiting transport

    I have a tendency to faint (syncope) anytime I feel claustrophobic or get a little too warm. It has happened enough of times that I recognize the warning signs that signal to me I am about to pass out.
    Sometimes, it happens too fast for me to do anything about it but other times, I have a few seconds and I immediately tell my husband or whomever is with me. On those occasions, I usually collapse without losing total consciousness (presyncope). From what my family members tell me, my "actions/jerky motions" are pretty much exactly what Hillary displayed on Sunday.


    Years ago (none / 0) (#172)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:48:18 AM EST
    I used to have episodes like that. One time I went down flat in the street and one time I passed out at work. There never was a reason for it. I was fine afterwords but I learned to recognize it was happening and avoid it.

    Also (none / 0) (#4)
    by Nemi on Mon Sep 12, 2016 at 04:10:17 PM EST
    listening to Greg Dworkin, who is himself a doctor, explaining on Kagro in the morning with David Waldman is both calming and reassuring. As he says:

    I am sitting back and watching everybody play doctor, while I try not to. I'm just a lung doctor, what would I know.

    And there's this conversation he had about the subject:

    Other person: You're a partisan!

    Dworkin: I happen to be a lung doctor.

    Other person: Yeah well, you're a partisan lung doctor!

    Heh, some people are just out of reach ... and whack, I guess. ;)

    This (none / 0) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:41:32 AM EST
    guy thinks Hillary may have been poisoned.

    Interesting theory considering the conservative alliance with Putin.

    That one (none / 0) (#108)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:06:38 PM EST
    Was a laugh er. The Concussion Dr is really stretching it there. Conspiracy theorists and tin foil, wasn't they only for the Alt Right?

    Funny how it only works in one direction (none / 0) (#113)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:12:30 PM EST
    You're a big defender of the wingnuts when it comes to their baseless claims about Hillary.

    Go figure.


    Tell me (none / 0) (#114)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:14:55 PM EST
    You really want to embrace this one.

    Be my guest


    Not in the least (none / 0) (#115)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:16:40 PM EST
    I think all CTs are ridiculous.

    Including the one's you defend.

    I just also like to point out blatant hypocrisy.


    Funny (none / 0) (#117)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 07:26:08 PM EST
    because you are the king of baseless speculation and thanks for taking the bait.

    However the fact of the matter is Putin has been known to poison many people. The GOP is aligned with Putin. Of course that doesn't mean that any poisoning happened to Hillary but in conservative world those two things together would mean absolutely Hillary was poisoned. Y'all have shown time and again that you don't need evidence only events that can be somehow woven together to make a fake story.


    i understood it (smile) (none / 0) (#134)
    by linea on Tue Sep 13, 2016 at 08:26:41 PM EST

    Excellent (none / 0) (#150)
    by Yman on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 12:44:12 PM EST
    Perhaps you can translate.

    Site Violator. (none / 0) (#139)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 03:13:51 AM EST
    Spam spam spam spam.

    Several members of the ski team (none / 0) (#146)
    by fishcamp on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 10:34:57 AM EST
    had walking pneumonia at the same time.  We jokingly referred to it as skiing pneumonia.  We all were skiing practice gates in 20 degree below zero weather, and breathed in ice crystals, that cut our lungs.  It was gone in one week, of course we were only twenty years old.  We all took antibiotics, but I was allergic to Penicillin, so I don't remember what they gave me.  There were not many antibiotics then.

    As for stumbling, am I the only one (none / 0) (#158)
    by Towanda on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 06:56:28 PM EST
    who remembers Bush the First, on the campaign trail, stumbling?  

    I remember Bush the Old Man fainting and vomiting. (none / 0) (#165)
    by desertswine on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 10:02:44 PM EST
    TOKYO, Thursday, Jan. 9-- President Bush fell suddenly ill and collapsed at a state dinner being given for him Wednesday night at the home of the Japanese Prime Minister.Today, Mr. Bush appeared for photographers, looking tired but cheerful, and apologized for the alarm his collapse had caused.

    Mr. Bush's spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater, said on Wednesday night, after the attack, that Mr. Bush had the kind of gastroenteritis commonly known as intestinal flu, but insisted nonetheless that he was "feeling fine." Under questioning, he acknowledged that Mr. Bush had thrown up at his seat just before collapsing and had been in what he called "a faint condition."

    I also recall... (none / 0) (#167)
    by desertswine on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 10:15:34 PM EST
    George (Is our children learning?) Bush passing out and taking a brody into a coffee table.

    In The Hubris Syndrome: Bush, Blair, and the Intoxication of Power, Owen recalls the time in 2002 when the commander in chief collapsed while sitting on a sofa watching a football game. (Official cause: he'd choked on a pretzel.) The presidential head hit a table on the way to the floor, he suffered an abrasion on the left side of his face, and a blood sample was rushed to Johns Hopkins, in Baltimore. Owen says he was told by a British doctor who had visited Johns Hopkins that lab technicians there found that the blood contained significant amounts of alcohol--this in the body of a man who claims he hasn't had a drop in more than 20 years.

    Dubya was drunk? (none / 0) (#182)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:57:33 PM EST
    That's a much funnier version of the pretzel story.

    "The Journal of Geriatric Cardiology" (none / 0) (#192)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:27:01 PM EST

    I agree (none / 0) (#195)
    by Nemi on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 08:00:16 AM EST
    with this editorial that 'media treatment of Hillary Clinton is sickening and sexist'. And I agree with this

    Instead, when she became unsteady from dehydration at a Sept. 11 memorial Sunday, Clinton gave some powerful ammunition to the army of dirty tricksters who have been spreading false rumors that she is at death's door.

    and this

    In the meantime, here's some unsolicited medical advice for Clinton: Drink more water.

    thread cleaned (none / 0) (#197)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 18, 2016 at 03:16:31 PM EST
    of off topic comments about Jim. I don't have time to read the whole thread, so some may be left.

    Jim, you are hijacking the threads. Stop or you are going into time out.