Message Board Archives

Should just sit back - stay out of the public eye for a while.

Polls suggest that since his meeting, Hillary lost 2% while giving Trump more wind for his bag.

Realclearpolitics.com

In reply to pelon

This is why I do not like the Clintons: They will do anything for power. This is the worst election in terms of choice for a long time. If the Republicans had a more likable and a more qualified candidate Hilary Clinton would be toast.

In reply to pelon

What was he thinking?

In reply to black
Black is back
forget the Clintons
Welcome back bro

In reply to black

hi black u back

In reply to voiceofreason

So what exactly did Bill Clinton do here?

In reply to voiceofreason

You are so right.


As for JoJo:



If he has to ask such a question, then there is no hope for him.

In reply to ProWI

Just answer the GD question:

What did Bill Clinton do?


The thing with you guys is that you all pretend that you are critical, independent thinkers, yet you all don't even realize how easily you get swayed by the smear and propaganda--just like the Fox News crowd that you folks so despise.

In reply to JOJO

Slow it down dere cowboy. That skunt pelon dumb as ass, and he is de first to tell you so.

Nobody on this thread "pretending to be critical, independent thinkers."

This does not require "critical thinking". The Clinton camp LOSS 2 percentage points the day this became public. 2% points drop the day.

Now if Clinton met her and told her how fine she looks, or was asking for her crepe souffle recipe or discussing the nuances of the case: the END RESULT hurt Hillary Clinton's camp. THAT SIMPLE.

So give we a facking break, and don't tek dis for more than that.



Who cares... it's the damage it can do, and has done.

In reply to pelon

My question was directed at VOR and ProWI who suggested that somehow Bill Clinton did something wrong by meeting with the AG. Besides, the polls reflect the perception (fed by the media) that somehow Bill was seeking some special favor relating to the emails.

Therefore, if one is suggesting that Bill did something wrong, then that would imply the AG was lying about the nature of the meeting and how it came about.

In reply to JOJO

And then people speak of "the liberal press". What a joke.

--Æ.

In reply to JayMor

If JoJo still wants to know what he did that was "wrong", poor JoJo still can't and will never get it.

Even the "Liberral Press" know what perception is all about in this case.

In politics, perception is reality and truth is negotiable. Politics is all about perception.

So let JoJo stick his neck in the sand, expose his rear end and ask, "what is wrong".

In reply to voiceofreason

Republicans had a qualified candidate in Kasich, they chose Trump.

In reply to ProWI

Since you will not (cannot) answer the question, let's just go with what AG Lynch said--this was a chance encounter between two old friends.

So are you suggesting that the AG lied about the nature of the meeting? So if this was more than a chance encounter, shouldn't the AG be sanctioned for her actions? And if the AG is not sanctioned, isn't president Obama complicit in protecting the Clintons in this criminal activity?

The press is expressing "outrage" about this meeting, but somehow they are careful to stop at the "evil Clintons". Why--because they know that this line of argument would find favor even among some of you "progressives".

In reply to JOJO

Both Clinton and Lynch showed poor judgment in this instance. Their meeting set up a chain reaction. It forced Hillary to set up that meeting with the FBI.

In reply to ProWI

Clinton showed poor judgment, he was not invited.

In reply to ProWI

Why? Because the media continues to suggest that somehow this meeting is linked to Clinton's emails? So when Bill or Hillary meet with the AG's boss (Obama), is there any suggestion that the meeting is linked to the emails?

About the Clinton-FBI meeting: it has Ben in the works for a while and represented the final step of the investigation.

BTW, the FBI has been consistent in stating that Clinton herself is not under investigation.but you would not know that from the Sunday shows.

In reply to black


And Lynch should have kicked his arse to the curb.

In reply to ProWI

True, but how do you tell an Ex-President to "get the fcuk out of here?"

In reply to JOJO

I can no longer take you as serious. Your partiality towards Hillary is causing you to display an overabundance of naïveté about the matter.

In reply to black

.....by "kicking his arse to the curb". She is an experienced and well respected woman who owes Bill no favours. Why soil her reputation for the Clintons?

Bad judgment.

In reply to JOJO

Look, I get your point but Clinton had to have known this was not going to look good. If he didn't know that, then something must be wrong with him. Old age setting in?

In reply to ProWI

Damn if you do, damn if you don't. It would have been seen as being disrespectful.

Some serious House of Cards shit.

_r

In reply to black

Not look good in the eyes of whom? As I said, you guys are so taken in by the right wing smear machine that you don't even realize it. The fact is, anything that the Clintons do is spun by the right wing as being some calculated act. So a chance meeting between two old friends is extended to being the machinations of the evil Clintons and the AG--a career prosecutor/lawyer--was just innocently taken in.

Take this whole email issue as an example. Both Powell and Condi Rice used privat emails as Secretaries of State. Powell actually DESTROYED his emails. Clinton KEPT her emails and made them available to the FBI. But somehow, Powell is innocent and Clintn had something to hide.

In reply to JOJO


Loretta Lynch has admitted it was a BIG mistake to meet with Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton says he regrets the meeting with Lynch

But poor ole JOJO's partisan hat weighs down his ability to see and think clearly in recognizing the folly of the meeting.

In reply to ProWI

Dude stop being a jackass!

This is elections crazy season. BOTH the AG and the Clintons would like put e issue to rest. They cannot do that be reiterating that there was nothing wrong with the meeting. Such a statement would just give more fodder to the right wing and the lazy press. So the best thing to do: say you regret the meeting and hope that everyone (including progressive who should know better by now) moves on.

BTW, what was the AG's first statement on the issue---that she said months ago, she will accept whatever recommendations put forward by the FBI; that this was just a chance encounter between old friends; that they did not discuss the FBI case. Her early statement made no mention of regretting the meeting.

In reply to ProWI

BTW, Judiicial Watch, the right wing group that has been pushing this email issue from the beginning, said this:

Do you agree with this statement or do you think that Bill was the only unethical party in this two-party voluntary meeting.

This from the alterative media ... stand fast Bernie's supporters

Link Text

In reply to nickoutr

He seems extremely biased.

In reply to nick2020
From time to time I browse thru various you tube videos from various agendas ... fun to watch

In reply to JOJO

Are you not making a case for caution?

In reply to JOJO

Can you point me to a credible reference for this? All the info I have read on Rice's or Powell's use of email say that they are not comparable to Clinton's at all. For example:

Link Text

Link Text

In reply to cedaw

Not comparable in what sense? That Clinton set up her own secure sever and was able to hand over all emails when requested?

In reply to cedaw

So to you it is better that Powell used confidential emails on his personal email that was hosted by some company? So an employee at some company could have been reading his emails?

In reply to JOJO

My reading of the OIG report is as follows:

In the early 2000's when Powell was in office, the official dept email system was antiquated and inadequate. In order to get the business of the state dept done more efficiently, Powell initiated a drive to get dept employees hooked up to a private email service provider for non classified communications. He did this completely in the open, and even used the state dept IT staff to install the lines to connect to the ISP.

In addition at that point in time, cyber threats were not perceived to be the risk they are now, so rules and regulations governing Powell's use of private email providers were much less mature and comprehensive.

In contrast, by the time Clinton came along, the perceived risk of cyberattacks was much higher, and the IT rules were much more detailed and prescriptive. The official state dept email system had also evolved into a much more functional system, obviating the need for private workarounds like Powell's

In spite of all of that, Clinton decided to set up her own personal email system, with presonally hired operators, without the knowledge or involvement of state dept IT.

Powell was obviously in the wrong by not adequately archiving emails, but taking context in consideration the two cases seem very different to me.

Powell hooked up his peeps with aol and hotmail accounts so they could get their jobs done properly.

What reason would there have been for Clinton to do what she did, other than to deliberately evade her legal obligations?

1. The investigation by the FBI was a criminal investigation.

2. The facts they adduced did not find a crime.

3. As a result, no charges have been made against Clinton.

4. Mouth make to talk, yes. And we will undoubtedly continue hearing many mouths in action even after this.

5. But this whole guilt by innuendo campaign has finally arrived at its terminus... out of gas.


//

In reply to Ewart

Politically, fact and fiction play second to populist perception.

In reply to pelon

Yes.

And we will see where Trump's first-fiddle playing takes him and his crowd of hangers-on in November.


//