Judge drops bomb on Hillary's cohort at the state department over her secret emails

[TX-Beau]

Not really a good answer. If Hillary can't get through things either, then the criticism isn't a fair one and is just a moot point being made over and over.

Hillary isn't promising moonbeams so saying this sounds a bit desperate.

- - - Updated - - -

If Bernie hadn't promised moonbeams would you still support him?

 

[evanrick]

Hillary isn't promising moonbeams so saying this sounds a bit desperate.

- - - Updated - - -

If Bernie hadn't promised moonbeams would you still support him?

Its better than Hillary's position of 'Ill do what I can'.

And its not desperate, Hillary people cannot see past their own nose at the hypocrisy that somehow she would have a better chance of getting her agenda, whatever that is, through congress?

They are two different people, Hillary an establishment candidate for the cynics.

And Bernie for people who think you have to get off your ass and stop being cynical to get anything done.

Obama is yes we can. Bernie is we must. Hillary's slogan of supporters is : We should take whatever we can get because if we demand more we might get nothing so we are happier being doormats for the establishment.

 

[evanrick]

Not really a good answer. If Hillary can't get through things either, then the criticism isn't a fair one and is just a moot point being made over and over.

Thats all they know - because thats all they know. Cynicism solves everything because nothing IS everything to Hillary land!!!!!

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Yes I would, because my reasons for voting for him aren't about "promising moonbeams", it is about a man who stuck to his convictions, about a man who actually fought for the people, one who got arrested for it. And he is still trying to fight for them now. Someone who isn't bought and got to where he got now because of people, not by corporate America.

I'd rather vote for someone like him when I have the chance to instead of the status quo, which is all Hillary is promising.

If you want to hold a political candidate to a certain standard, then they all need to be held by that standard.

 

[TX-Beau]

Its better than Hillary's position of 'Ill do what I can'.

And its not desperate, Hillary people cannot see past their own nose at the hypocrisy that somehow she would have a better chance of getting her agenda, whatever that is, through congress?

They are two different people, Hillary an establishment candidate for the cynics.

And Bernie for people who think you have to get off your ass and stop being cynical to get anything done.

Obama is yes we can. Bernie is we must. Hillary's slogan of supporters is : We should take whatever we can get because if we demand more we might get nothing so we are happier being doormats for the establishment.

You haven't made one damn argument for Bernie so I don't see why anyone should pay attention to you.

 

[evanrick]

You cant accuse Hillary of anything, that's politically incorrect and might hurt someones feelings. shes a ex-republican progressive one day a moderate the next. Hillary said Sanders wanted someone to primary Obama. Hillary did.
She calls Sanders a single issue candidate, well Hillary is a single street candidate, Wall Street.

 

[TX-Beau]

Yes I would, because my reasons for voting for him aren't about "promising moonbeams", it is about a man who stuck to his convictions, about a man who actually fought for the people, one who got arrested for it. And he is still trying to fight for them now. Someone who isn't bought and got to where he got now because of people, not by corporate America.

I'd rather vote for someone like him when I have the chance to instead of the status quo, which is all Hillary is promising.

If you want to hold a political candidate to a certain standard, then they all need to be held by that standard.

A lot of this is Bernie mythology, you don't spend 30 years in congress without making compromises along the way, and I also don't see what virtue intractability in a politician is either. I don't see a problem with a politician who will change policy because of public pressure.

I also don't see why you automatically assume that Hilary is "status quo" certainly her position on women's issues - about which she has been as intractable as you'd like are nothing of the sort.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

What is this mythology? If you are talking about the civil rights movement stuff, you'd be wrong.

Making comprises does not mean he changed his views or what he believed in. He doesn't flip flop, there is plenty of evidence that he has held the same ideals for decades. And that doesn't mean he is a person who won't work with compromises when it comes to the white house. This criticism is based on assumption, clearly a man who has worked in the political arena all his life understands this, as do I.

I do see a problem with a Politician who will bend to the public pressure when I have the option to vote against someone like that and it is disingenuous, they don't actually care about the issues they just care about their image. That is a part of the status quo.

Her position on woman's rights might have been the same, but plenty of others things have not. As a gay person, I have a problem with someone that didn't agree with us having the same rights until less than a decade ago and when I have the option to vote against her I will.

 

[evanrick]

You haven't made one damn argument for Bernie so I don't see why anyone should pay attention to you.

I have tried this approach in the past but i guess other people were not paying attention when all Hillary supporters kept saying the same thing over and over like "it will never happen" "its pie in the sky" "hes all unicorns and rainbows" "hes making promises he cant keep" which has now morphed into "hes a single issue candidate"

 

[TX-Beau]

What is this mythology? If you are talking about the civil rights movement stuff, you'd be wrong.

Making comprises does not mean he changed his views or what he believed in. He doesn't flip flop, there is plenty of evidence that he has held the same ideals for decades. And that doesn't mean he is a person who won't work with compromises when it comes to the white house. This criticism is based on assumption, clearly a man who has worked in the political arena all his life understands this, as do I.

I do see a problem with a Politician who will bend to the public pressure when I have the option to vote against someone like that and it is disingenuous, they don't actually care about the issues they just care about their image. That is a part of the status quo.

Her position on woman's rights might have been the same, but plenty of others things have not. As a gay person, I have a problem with someone that didn't agree with us having the same rights until less than a decade ago and when I have the option to vote against her I will.

The Bernie mythology is that he's somehow this revolutionary outsider that stands solely upon principle most holy; but he's actually a total insider who's been playing this game for 30 years. Great for Bernie that he was a civil rights activist a lifetime ago, so were a huge number of Dems and liberals.

My intent here isn't to denigrate Bernie, I'll be voting for him in Texas - for all the good that's going to do, and I probably wouldn't if he was going to present a serious challenge to Hilary, which he isn't.

Texas though is a prime example of why Bernie scares me. Hilary will win Texas because of her support for women's issues. in a state where the real enemy has made abortion all but illegal, has made contraception hard to get - unless you can pay, has closed clinics for poor women, and almost managed to run Planned Parenthood out of business. A state where we pay twicw for our expensive healthcare if we have it at all, and tuition is high and education is under attack.

Do I wish Bernie's revolution would arrive, you fucking bet I do. BUT I don't think that ushering in the people who fucked us over on a tide of Bernie fervor is going to help anyone.

The fanatic calls that cynicism, it isn't, it's looking at the face of the real opposition and know that defeating THAT is the FIRST priority.

Perhaps Hilary won't push for free college, but she for damn sure isn't going to try and de-fund Planned Parenthood, and work to overturn gay marriage either.

 

[NotHardUp1]

Perhaps the leveling of the argument against Sanders is due to the extremity of change. Although I am very much a socialist in nature, I have no delusions of it being swept in via some bloodless revolution overnight. It is a long-haul trek, and it has come in gradual degree, just like the health care issue and recent changes.

And there couldn't be a better topic to use to showcase Clinton's commitment, as the greatest portion of her unpopularity actually originates in her original courage to take up the gauntlet when her husband was in the White House.

The comments about DOMA are both false and off: the Clintons successfully navigated the path to a two-term presidency, and had to leave some issues by the wayside to do that. They have always worked together as a political team and yet do. The implication to the contrary is both unfounded and wrong. Be sure they have a hive mind when it comes to their joint political future.

 

[jbrown329]

Hillary isn't promising moonbeams so saying this sounds a bit desperate.

- - - Updated - - -

If Bernie hadn't promised moonbeams would you still support him?

Yes. Wall Street needs to be reigned in. IMO Bernie would try to go further than Hillary. Also, Bernie was highly vocal about CU, a long time ago. If Hillary said anything about it, I didn't hear. I'm not saying that she didn't, just that I haven't heard it.

Plus, I am elated that Bernie isn't taking money from Super PACs. That right there makes him more accountable to voters, not big money.

 

[opinterph]

Hillary said Sanders wanted someone to primary Obama. Hillary did.

It appears that you do not understand the context of the situation. Hillary Clinton served in the Obama Cabinet during the entire 2012-election cycle.

The 2012 Obama Campaign Took Bernie Sanders' Primary Threat Seriously (Mother Jones; February 2016)

 

[evanrick]

It appears that you do not understand the context of the situation. Hillary Clinton served in the Obama Cabinet during the entire 2012-election cycle.

The 2012 Obama Campaign Took Bernie Sanders' Primary Threat Seriously (Mother Jones; February 2016)

No - I fully understand the context, so do Sanders supporters and so does Bernie, that is why he said it.
And who cares what Hillary thinks?

If Clinton is worried about party loyalty is she going to reject Reid's endorsement? Because he flat out lied to her face that he was neutral between her and Obama.

But if you forget the context, its still a true statement and doesnt take away its meaning in the slightest. Hillary wants to assume the Obama mantle, but seems unaware or bitter she lost in 2008. Its that kind of 2 dimensional thinking that hinders their campaign. HRC created that opening, and the only people that are upset that it was exploited were people who were never going to support Sanders to begin with, so why should we care what they think either?

 

[Kabluey]

Perhaps the leveling of the argument against Sanders is due to the extremity of change. Although I am very much a socialist in nature, I have no delusions of it being swept in via some bloodless revolution overnight. It is a long-haul trek, and it has come in gradual degree, just like the health care issue and recent changes.

And there couldn't be a better topic to use to showcase Clinton's commitment, as the greatest portion of her unpopularity actually originates in her original courage to take up the gauntlet when her husband was in the White House.

The comments about DOMA are both false and off: the Clintons successfully navigated the path to a two-term presidency, and had to leave some issues by the wayside to do that. They have always worked together as a political team and yet do. The implication to the contrary is both unfounded and wrong. Be sure they have a hive mind when it comes to their joint political future.

I suspect that if Bernie attempted to implement the policies he's promised, the republicans would take the nuclear option and aim for full shutdown.
If moderate policies introduced by Obama met with unreasonable obstruction, who knows what more liberal policies might do to the shark tank.
Actually, everyone knows.

 

[lambdaboy]

Anyone who goes along with this bull shit is an idiot leave her alone and vote for whoever wins the Dem Convention or shut the f up when the Republicans treat you like the Nazi's treated the gays!

 

[opinterph]

No - I fully understand the context, so do Sanders supporters and so does Bernie, that is why he said it.

… But if you forget the context, its still a true statement and doesnt take away its meaning in the slightest.

The United States Senate career of Barack Obama began on January 4, 2005 and ended on November 16, 2008.

Senator Sanders’ suggestion that President Obama should face a primary challenge was made in 2011. He stated that “what the president is doing” should be contrasted with “a progressive agenda.” Please note – At that point in time [2011], Mr. Obama was president.

In 2008, then Senator, Obama was less than half way through his first term in the US Senate and was not up for reelection. Thus, he could not face a primary challenge in 2008.

In 2008 the incumbent president was George W. Bush. He was nearing the end of his 2nd term as president and having been twice elected to that office was not eligible to seek a 3rd term. Thus, President Bush could not face a primary challenge from within his own party in 2008.

Like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (and others) sought the nomination of the Democratic Party in 2008 to stand in a general election to become president. Because the incumbent president was of a different political party and because none of the Democratic candidates were challenging a member of their own party for the nomination – there was no primary challenge for the presidency in 2008.

Primary Challenge (Wiki)​

After his failed attempts to become Vermont governor in 1972 and US senator for Vermont in 1976, Mr. Sanders resigned from the Liberty Union Party in 1977. In 1980 he ran for Mayor of Burlington, Vermont as a member of the Progressive Party. He won that election by 10 votes.

In 1988, then Mayor, Sanders ran an unsuccessful campaign as an independent candidate for Vermont representative to the US House of Representatives. Two years later he ran again as an independent and won the sole congressional seat representing the State of Vermont. He served in that office for 16 years.

In 2005, then Representative, Sanders ran as an independent candidate and was successfully elected to the US Senate from the State of Vermont. He began his second 6-year term in that office in 2012 and remains in that office currently.

In 2015, Senator Sanders announced that he would seek the nomination of the Democratic Party to become president. In unison with that announcement, he also claimed his affiliation to the Democratic Party. [Link]

 

[MisterB]

Believing congress to be immutable is a characteristic of cynicism just fyi. But lets go by your assertion that congress has all the power in the world, even if it did the president had zero chance of getting an appointment to the court, your argument is that he shouldn't even try.

This is they cynicism i was talking about, i made an entire thread about it a month ago, and it just seems to never go away.

East coast people are obsessed with cynicism, obsessed with congress. I really think it has to do with proximity to DC and the influence of military contractors and government agencies that this attitude is so pervasive in Hillary land.

Here's some personal experience from a retired WashDC fed. It's not cynicism; it's reality. What gets accomplished is based mostly on relationships. Period. It's who you know, who you've helped out before, who you've smoozed (you get the drift here) that is the real "secret" to how stuff is accomplished. Some people label it with different terms, such as "working together" or "compromise". But "outsiders" usually are stymied and confused about all this until the light bulb goes off. If it ever does.

Now, if you please, allow me to attempt to return somewhere near the topic at hand.

So then--What effect will the fact that both of Hillary's predecessors also used private e-mail servers while Secretary of State have on this issue? Did they have e-mails that were re-classified AFTER being sent/received? Will they and their aides be treated similarly to Mrs. Clinton with this level of scrutiny?

 

[evanrick]

Here's some personal experience from a retired WashDC fed. It's not cynicism; it's reality. What gets accomplished is based mostly on relationships. Period. It's who you know, who you've helped out before, who you've smoozed (you get the drift here) that is the real "secret" to how stuff is accomplished. Some people label it with different terms, such as "working together" or "compromise". But "outsiders" usually are stymied and confused about all this until the light bulb goes off. If it ever does.

Now, if you please, allow me to attempt to return somewhere near the topic at hand.

So then--What effect will the fact that both of Hillary's predecessors also used private e-mail servers while Secretary of State have on this issue? Did they have e-mails that were re-classified AFTER being sent/received? Will they and their aides be treated similarly to Mrs. Clinton with this level of scrutiny?

establishment talk.

 

[evanrick]

The United States Senate career of Barack Obama began on January 4, 2005 and ended on November 16, 2008.

Senator Sanders’ suggestion that President Obama should face a primary challenge was made in 2011. He stated that “what the president is doing” should be contrasted with “a progressive agenda.” Please note – At that point in time [2011], Mr. Obama was president.

In 2008, then Senator, Obama was less than half way through his first term in the US Senate and was not up for reelection. Thus, he could not face a primary challenge in 2008.

In 2008 the incumbent president was George W. Bush. He was nearing the end of his 2nd term as president and having been twice elected to that office was not eligible to seek a 3rd term. Thus, President Bush could not face a primary challenge from within his own party in 2008.

Like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (and others) sought the nomination of the Democratic Party in 2008 to stand in a general election to become president. Because the incumbent president was of a different political party and because none of the Democratic candidates were challenging a member of their own party for the nomination – there was no primary challenge for the presidency in 2008.

Primary Challenge (Wiki)​

After his failed attempts to become Vermont governor in 1972 and US senator for Vermont in 1976, Mr. Sanders resigned from the Liberty Union Party in 1977. In 1980 he ran for Mayor of Burlington, Vermont as a member of the Progressive Party. He won that election by 10 votes.

In 1988, then Mayor, Sanders ran an unsuccessful campaign as an independent candidate for Vermont representative to the US House of Representatives. Two years later he ran again as an independent and won the sole congressional seat representing the State of Vermont. He served in that office for 16 years.

In 2005, then Representative, Sanders ran as an independent candidate and was successfully elected to the US Senate from the State of Vermont. He began his second 6-year term in that office in 2012 and remains in that office currently.

In 2015, Senator Sanders announced that he would seek the nomination of the Democratic Party to become president. In unison with that announcement, he also claimed his affiliation to the Democratic Party. [Link]

Nonsense. Hillary is attacking Sanders by suggesting that someone run against him. She did.