Politics Enough with the Hillary cult: Her admirers ignore reality, dream of worshipping a queen

[Denny Crane]

I'm just responding to your ravings - I don't think I ever claimed that that article, or the Washington Post in particular, was unbiased.

However, now that you bring it up, I do think there is a fundamental difference between the Washington Post and the propaganda arm of a foreign government. Maybe you don't?



Sorry, can't read it without paying them 99 cents, which I simply can't afford. Maybe after Trump cuts my taxes (or raises them, depending on which day of the week it is).



I'll take your word for it that conservatives look for unbiased news. They certainly appear to have very little ability to recognize it once they find it, so maybe that's the real problem.

barfo

You brought up bias as if it makes a whole lot of difference if the emails are what they printed.

 

[barfo]

You brought up bias as if it makes a whole lot of difference if the emails are what they printed.

No, I brought up the fact that you mischaracterized the source. It wasn't RT I was accusing of bias. I was accusing you of bias. Sorry I wasn't clear about that.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

No, I brought up the fact that you mischaracterized the source. It wasn't RT I was accusing of bias. I was accusing you of bias. Sorry I wasn't clear about that.

barfo

I showed no bias. Just pointed out what the source is.

If you can show the emails they included in the article are not legit, I'm waiting. Somehow, I doubt you can.

 

[dviss1]

She absolutely said "what difference does it make."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...t-hillary-clintons-what-difference-does-it-m/

"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans," Clinton said. "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"




She lied about it being a protest. Her emails actually show she knew it was a terrorist attack.

Show me an email that says she knew it was a terrorist attack BEFORE thinking it was a spontaneous protest. Hindsight is 20/20. It's really easy to say she lied without proving it. It could have happened JUST like they said. It was a protest and hidden inside the protesters were armed terrorists who attacked us.

So....

We're supposed to believe that we shouldn't allow Syrian refugees into the country because terrorists might be hidden amongst them....

While simultaneously believing there's no possible way that terrorists could have been hidden amongst the Bengazi protesters?

 

[Denny Crane]

Show me an email that says she knew it was a terrorist attack BEFORE thinking it was a spontaneous protest. Hindsight is 20/20. It's really easy to say she lied without proving it. It could have happened JUST like they said. It was a protest and hidden inside the protesters were armed terrorists who attacked us.

So....

We're supposed to believe that we shouldn't allow Syrian refugees into the country because terrorists might be hidden amongst them....

While simultaneously believing there's no possible way that terrorists could have been hidden amongst the Bengazi protesters?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/30/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi-emails/

In the exchange from the night of the attack, Clinton told her daughter Chelsea -- who was using the pseudonym "Diane Reynolds" -- that the attack was launched by "an Al Queda-like group."

...

On the same night Clinton wrote the email to her daughter, she also released a public statement condemning the attack, which noted, "Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."

In the days and weeks that followed, the administration struggled to explain the attacks, and came under a firestorm of criticism for drawing a connection between the attack and an anti-Islam video released in the United States.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/benghazi-hearing-whats-new/

The first was an email sent Sept. 12, 2012, by State Department Public Affairs Officer Lawrence Randolph that summarized a call between Clinton and then-Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Qandil a day after the attacks in Benghazi. That email quotes Clinton as saying, “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack — not a protest.”

 

[Denny Crane]

Waiting for barfo to deflect with some attack on CNN or the author.

In 3....2.....1

 

[MarAzul]

She absolutely said "what difference does it make."

She absolutely did it. I vividly remember her doing so. I could not believe the woman could be so callous as to say it.
It even seems worse now that she is trying to make everyone believe she never blamed a video for the attack.
What difference does it make seems to be the dumbest thing possible to say after telling the relatives of the people killed, it was the video.
Geez! The woman has insufferable insolence.

 

[MarAzul]

Did anyone here ever go watch the video that Hillary blamed for the attack? I looked it up the day Susan Rice told everyone it was the Video.
Watched it for several minuted then I said to myself, no frigging way did this poor quality dumb amateurish video inspire anyone to do anything.
Let alone cause a mob, to go find a mortar, and attack a US embassy. Then I thought; How the hell do they (our government) come up with such bazaar bullshit? And Why? Still have no answer, and the woman that knows says, "What difference does it make?". Jail is where she belongs not the White house.

 

[barfo]

I showed no bias. Just pointed out what the source is.

Sure, an 'official russian news site'. And the KKK is an 'activist group' and Hitler was an 'inspirational leader'.

If you can show the emails they included in the article are not legit, I'm waiting. Somehow, I doubt you can.

I can't. Nor can you show they are legit. So I guess it's a draw, except that I won't be trafficking in conspiracy theories if it doesn't end up the way I expect.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Sure, an 'official russian news site'. And the KKK is an 'activist group' and Hitler was an 'inspirational leader'.



I can't. Nor can you show they are legit. So I guess it's a draw, except that I won't be trafficking in conspiracy theories if it doesn't end up the way I expect.

barfo

I guess you lose.

The emails had Hiliar's email address as well as blumenthal's. WaPost reports the emails were published by RT.com. Not sure I should believe you or the newspapers. Ok, I am sure not to believe you.

As reported by WaPost and NYTimes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...in-registered-the-day-of-her-senate-hearings/

Hacked e-mails indicate that Hillary Clinton used a domain registered the day of her Senate hearings

By Philip Bump March 2, 2015

• Why Clinton’s private e-mail address is bad news

Hillary Clinton's private e-mail address that she used while secretary of state reinforces everything people don't like about her, argues The Post's Chris Cillizza, and is very dangerous to her presidential ambitions. (The Washington Post)

The New York Times reported Monday night that, during her tenure at the State Department, Hillary Clinton never used her official e-mail account to conduct communications, relying instead on a private e-mail account. As the Times notes, only official accounts are automatically retained under the Federal Records Act, meaning that none of Clinton's e-mail communication was preserved.

In March 2013, an adviser to Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, had his e-mail hacked by "Guccifer" -- the Romanian hacker perhaps best known for revealing George W. Bush's paintings to the world. At the time, Gawker reported that Blumenthal was communicating with an account that appeared to belong to Clinton at the "clintonemail.com" domain. The content of some of those e-mails was published by RT.com.

 

[Denny Crane]

The NYTimes article is also enlightening.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/u...-raises-flags.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=3&referrer=

WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record.

Mrs. Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act.

...

Under federal law, however, letters and emails written and received by federal officials, such as the secretary of state, are considered government records and are supposed to be retained so that congressional committees, historians and members of the news media can find them. There are exceptions to the law for certain classified and sensitive materials.

Mrs. Clinton is not the first government official — or first secretary of state — to use a personal email account on which to conduct official business. But her exclusive use of her private email, for all of her work, appears unusual, Mr. Baron said. The use of private email accounts is supposed to be limited to emergencies, experts said, such as when an agency’s computer server is not working.

“I can recall no instance in my time at the National Archives when a high-ranking official at an executive branch agency solely used a personal email account for the transaction of government business,” said Mr. Baron, who worked at the agency from 2000 to 2013.

Regulations from the National Archives and Records Administration at the time required that any emails sent or received from personal accounts be preserved as part of the agency’s records.

But Mrs. Clinton and her aides failed to do so.

 

[Denny Crane]

The comic sans font is because guccifer copied and pasted the contents of the emails to something like notepad, and he used that font. Probably to laugh at the stupidity of those he hacked.

The reason he copy/pasted the emails was so the mail headers wouldn't be included. Those might give someone trying to track him certain clues as to his location, or the series of servers used.

 

[Denny Crane]

The trend continues?

Bernie defeats Hiliar again.

Meanwhile:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/what-landslide/482088/

What Democratic Landslide?
Warning: Candidates in this election may be closer than they appear.

To listen to the handwringing from despondent Republicans and the self-assurance from exultant Democrats over the last week, a Hillary Clinton landslide defeat of Donald Trump in November seemed a fait accompli. On Tuesday morning, however, the release of a group of polls put a damper on that forecast—at least for a few hours until the next ones come out.

The swing-state surveys from Quinnipiac University and a national snapshot from Public Policy Polling, a left-leaning firm, show a surprisingly close general-election race. The PPP survey found Clinton leading Trump by just four points nationally, 42 percent to 38 percent, while Quinnipiac found the two essentially tied in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Trump edged Clinton by four points in the Buckeye State, and Clinton led him by a point in Florida and Pennsylvania. As with any poll taken six months before the election, these require a couple grains of salt, and in the case of Quinnipiac, perhaps a few more. Other political forecasters pointed out that its sample of voters in the three states was more white than in 2012 exit polls, while the electorate is expected to be similar in 2016 if not more diverse than four years ago. A sample with more white voters would favor Republicans.

Still, both sets of data point to a tighter contest than other recent polls and far closer than the congealing conventional wisdom would suggest. A CNN/ORC national survey released last week gave Clinton a 13-point advantage, and the RealClearPolitics average has her up by more than six points. Polls that show Clinton leading Trump by nine points in North Carolina and down by just one in traditionally Republican Georgia contributed to the impression that the campaign was over before it started.

(Note mention of RCP average)

http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_13/filters/LIKELY:1/dates/20160505-20160510/type/day

Reuters running poll.

Hiliar 41.3%, Trump 40.0%

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Trump has no idea what the GI Bill is, lol.



Just rambles and won't answer the question.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

For Denny and Barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

For Denny and Barfo

Everyone loves Hiliar.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Everyone loves Hiliar.

You sure talk about her a lot. Clinton/Crane 2016!

 

[Denny Crane]

You sure talk about her a lot. Clinton/Crane 2016!

Let's talk about Sanders then.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...onfirmed-sanders-is-selling-a-fantasy-agenda/

Confirmed: Sanders is selling a fantasy agenda

But there is a massive catch. Sanders’s assurance that he has “a plan to pay for every spending program he has introduced to date” is wrong. And not just wrong, but extravagantly so. Even with his large tax increases, Sanders would fall $18 trillion short over just 10 years. Factoring in interest costs, his plan would add $21 trillion to the debt over a decade. That is more than the roughly $19 trillion the Treasury already owes. And the picture would probably get much worse as time went on. Expanding Social Security, for example, would become much more expensive as more people retired.

Sanders’s health-care plan is the big budget-buster. It alone would cost $32 trillion over 10 years — “more than twice the new revenues” that Sanders would raise, Len Burman, the director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said on Monday. When reporters have asked Sanders about the costs of his health-care plan in the past, the senator has typically responded that other countries maintain functioning single-payer systems — as though he has not proposed a specific plan that should be assessed on its own merits. Burman pointed out Monday that other countries do not promise their people as much as Sanders does. Making his system less costly, the analysts found, would require doing very unpopular things. Deeply cutting payments to doctors and hospitals, for example, would induce “supply constraints” — that is, a shortage of providers willing to meet demand for health services, which would make it harder to access care. Think long wait times and other hurdles.

(Brookings Institution is a far left wing think tank)

http://www.brookings.edu/about/centers/taxpolicy

The Tax Policy Center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. The center is made up of nationally recognized experts in tax, budget, and social policy who have served at the highest levels of government.

TPC provides timely, accessible analysis and facts about tax policy to policymakers, journalists, citizens, and researchers.

 

[Denny Crane]

Let's talk about Sanders and Hiliar.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/11/sanders-nominating-clinton-would-be-disaster/

Sanders: Nominating Clinton would be ‘disaster’ for party, nation

 

[Denny Crane]

This election is a freakin' disaster.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN0Y21TN

Exclusive: Trump surges in support, almost even with Clinton in national U.S. poll

Donald Trump's support has surged and he is now running nearly even with Democrat Hillary Clinton among likely U.S. voters, a dramatic turnaround since he became the Republican party's presumptive presidential nominee, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday.

The results could signal a close fight between the two likely White House rivals as Americans make up their minds ahead of the Nov. 8 election to succeed Democratic President Barack Obama. As recently as last week, Clinton led Trump by around 13 points in the poll.

In the most recent survey, 41 percent of likely voters supported Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, and 40 percent backed Trump, with 19 percent not decided on either yet, according to the online poll of 1,289 people conducted from Friday to Tuesday. The poll had a credibility interval of about 3 percentage points.

The results reflect a big increase in support for Trump since he knocked out U.S. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Ohio Governor John Kasich last week to become the last Republican in the White House race.

 

[MarAzul]

This election is a freakin' disaster.

Not at all. We have the best opportunity to get this country a leader again, best chance in 5 elections now.

 

[Denny Crane]

Not at all. We have the best opportunity to get this country a leader again, best chance in 5 elections now.

Both candidates are just godawful and neither one is going to be very good for the nation.

Here's an old picture of a Trump rally:

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

Both candidates are just godawful and neither one is going to be very good for the nation.

Here's an old picture of a Trump rally:

If you look closely you can see Mags working the ticket booth.

 

[Denny Crane]

If you look closely you can see Mags working the ticket booth.

The entire Mags Klan

 

[MarAzul]

Both candidates are just godawful and neither one is going to be very good for the nation.

Here's an old picture of a Trump rally:

I guess you had best stay out of sight Denny. I am sorry you feel the fear.

 

[Denny Crane]

I guess you had best stay out of sight Denny. I am sorry you feel the fear.

I don't feel the fear, but if Trump gets his way, many millions will. That will be a tragedy of enormous proportions, crimes against humanity.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-investigation-fbi-james-comey-223071

Comey also swatted away a series of questions about the status of the investigation, describing it only as pending. He did repeat that he is tracking the probe closely.

"I remain close to that investigation to make sure that it’s done well and has the resources that are needed...My goal in any investigation is to do it well and do it promptly, especially investigations of intense public interest. All of that remains true,” Comey said at the outset of the hour-long session. “It remains under investigation.”

Asked about complaints from some security clearance holders that they would be in jail if they acted similarly to Clinton, the FBI director declined to comment directly, but said: "There's no special set of rules for anybody that the FBI investigates."

...

Clinton and her team have made a point of not describing the FBI's work as an "investigation," but alternately as a "security review" or "security inquiry." They've also noted that the issue was referred to the FBI not as a criminal matter but as an intelligence breach.

However, in response to a question Wednesday, Comey said he wasn't familiar with the term "security inquiry" that Clinton and her aides have used. The FBI chief said he considers the work agents are doing to be an "investigation."

"It's in our name. I'm not familiar with the term 'security inquiry','" the director said.

 

[MarAzul]

That will be a tragedy of enormous proportions, crimes against humanity.

Strong opinions of events that have yet to happen. And then if they do, I imagine opinions of the actual event will vary widely, perhaps the most width between yours and mine. We will be fortunate if we set on the path to the events indoubt.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[MarAzul]

Geez! Can you read that without experiencing overload?