Hillary Rodham Clinton: 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee

[MulletorHater]

I read about the rogue agents this afternoon.  What is it about a 68-year-old woman trying to break the ultimate glass ceiling that drives some people out of their minds?

Here's an interesting opinion piece in The New York Times that discusses how Hillary met Satan.  Fascinating reading!

How Hillary Met Satan

[BW Manilowe]

According to this Tweet from NBC Nightly News, Senator Reid (D-NV)--I think he's the Senate Minority Leader--has sent ("issued") a letter to Comey, citing "a disturbing double standard" in regards to his treatment of the Clinton email issue.

https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/792846527811186689?p=v

[Padma]

At least Harry Reid brings a knife to the fight.

[captain1]

Ruby24 I think you meant to say "Bigly"

[Nidratime]

Harry Reid -- and yes, he is the Democratic minority leader and used to be the majority leader -- is a fighter, literally and figuratively. He used to be a boxer.

[Morrigan2575]

26 minutes ago, Padma said:

At least Harry Reid brings a knife to the fight.

Love him, so sad he's retiring. Will be very upset if his seat goes to a Republican

[HumblePi]

45 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Most likely he was promised a kind of informal golden parachute. Think about it. He ended his FBI career the moment he did this. If the Dems win, he just gets fired. If the Reps win, they quiet urge him to retire quickly so people stop asking questions every time his name is in the press. 

My feeling is that someone arranged a nice fat future paycheck for him as a "consultant" for something (a PAC maybe?) 

From what was said this morning on CNN, James Comey has a 10 year contract with the FBI, he was contracted in 2013 so he has 7 more years has left on that contract. Even if Donald Trump wins the election, James Comey will still have his job. The news also said that the FBI is extremely divided internally on this case, so James Comey will have to work very hard to bring his own people together and on the same page. He made an independent decision to go against longstanding Justice Department and FBI practice to not comment publicly about politically sensitive investigations within 60 days of an election.

Overall, the extension of this investigation into the emails of Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner is what's going to be investigated. Whether Huma risked compromising classified information sent by Hillary Clinton to her by sharing it with Anthony Weiner's laptop will be scrutinized.

[MulletorHater]

Well, here's a little bit of good news for the evening.  Early Voting Helps Hillary

That's why early voting is so important and why the GOP has worked so diligently to curtail it.  Rachel Maddow said on her show a few weeks ago that early voting tends to help Democrats.  As of now, 21 million votes have been cast.  I feel proud to be in that number.  Hopefully, this bodes well and will continue through Election Day.

I am going to try to restrain myself from checking 538 more than twice a day. 

[Ladyrain]

10 hours ago, starri said:

This calmed me a bit.

If you add up the states that she has, even if NC, FL, and NV don't stay "barely Democratic" she still wins.  All she needs is to lock up the states where's she's unambiguously ahead.  If they call PA and VA for her, it's over.

Thanks for the link.  It did calm me a bit too. 

[MulletorHater]

1 hour ago, Kromm said:

Most likely he was promised a kind of informal golden parachute. Think about it. He ended his FBI career the moment he did this. If the Dems win, he just gets fired. If the Reps win, they quiet urge him to retire quickly so people stop asking questions every time his name is in the press. 

My feeling is that someone arranged a nice fat future paycheck for him as a "consultant" for something (a PAC maybe?) 

I think when his career finally ends, he'll be a commentator on Fox News.  Isn't that where they all end up?

[needschocolate]

Quote

 

7 HOURS AGO, NEEDSCHOCOLATE SAID:

For a few seconds, let's just go along with the notion that Comey was between the proverbial rock and hard place - if he didn't mention finding emails and something significant turned up after Hillary was elected, there would be firestorm. Therefore, he had to disclose finding the emails (remember, we are just pretending he had a good reason to write the letter). Then, he has a duty to make this disclosure fair and include such phrases as "since I am disclosing an investigation into one candidate, in order to be fair, I also need to disclose any investigations involving any other presidential candidates...." and " The newly obtained emails had been uploaded to a laptop by an employee for the purpose of being printed out.  They are likely duplicates of emails we have previously seen, but will be reviewed carefully to confirm this."

 

 

5 hours ago, magdalene said:

I don't buy it.  I think it's much more likely that his political affiliation biased him against Hilary to begin with.  When he couldn't make criminal charges against her he decided to give her a verbal spanking for being "a naughty girl".  Which is certainly not in his job description.  Then when these e-mails were brought to his attention he decided to stick it to her right before the election.  I read he went against what his boss wanted and I hope he ultimately loses his job over this.

I completely agree with you.  The point I was trying to make was that even if Comey explanation was legitimate, the way he wrote the letter show that he was biased, that there are ways he could have been less biased and more fair, but he didn't go that route.  

[atomationage]

1 hour ago, MulletorHater said:

How Hillary Met Satan

This link just goes back to this page.

[KerleyQ]

29 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

From what was said this morning on CNN, James Comey has a 10 year contract with the FBI, he was contracted in 2013 so he has 7 more years has left on that contract. Even if Donald Trump wins the election, James Comey will still have his job. The news also said that the FBI is extremely divided internally on this case, so James Comey will have to work very hard to bring his own people together and on the same page. He made an independent decision to go against longstanding Justice Department and FBI practice to not comment publicly about politically sensitive investigations within 60 days of an election.

Overall, the extension of this investigation into the emails of Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner is what's going to be investigated. Whether Huma risked compromising classified information sent by Hillary Clinton to her by sharing it with Anthony Weiner's laptop will be scrutinized.

He may not still have a job after this stunt.  Violating some of the long held ethics and professional conduct standards of his position may very well be an impeachable offense.  Of course, whether he ends up impeached will depend on who controls Congress after this whole mess is over. 

[magdalene]

I have always suspected that some of those people you see on TV claiming to be still undecided voters are really Trump groupies playing possum. Or attention whores angling to get into a focus group.  Or lazy and/or just not very bright.  Because it's not like the two options are so much alike that you really would have to ponder "hmm, which way to go..." 

[Nidratime]

Quote

I think when his career finally ends, he'll be a commentator on Fox News.  Isn't that where they all end up?

Or, perhaps on Trump TV. Heh.

Quote

Of course, whether he ends up impeached will depend on who controls Congress after this whole mess is over.

The House impeaches (which is the same thing as indicting) and the Senate tries the case. So, the House isn't likely to impeach Comey unless he screws Trump which he doesn't seem very interested in doing. All the info on the Trump campaign's link to the Russians is hush-hush unlike the emails non-scandal.

Thank you, gerrymandering which we should totally get rid of.

[Jaded]

1 hour ago, MulletorHater said:

I read about the rogue agents this afternoon.  What is it about a 68-year-old woman trying to break the ultimate glass ceiling that drives some people out of their minds?

Here's an interesting opinion piece in The New York Times that discusses how Hillary met Satan.  Fascinating reading!

How Hillary Met Satan

 

14 minutes ago, atomationage said:

This link just goes back to this page.

This link should work.....

[Keepitmoving]

I love that old man Harry Reid, just something about him.  He would send a letter to Comey, LOL. His groggy, hoarse voice and battered up look, but he's still a boxer. When his face was busted up, but he was still talking shit, hilarious.  I was like damn, look at him, but he's still bitching in the mike about republicans. We need more of Reids and Pelosi's in the democratic party IMO. When his answer to Chris Matthews as to what won't he miss, was to look Matthews in the eye and say "you." Oh, love it.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[atomationage]

Hillary (Khaleesi) is coming to Westeros:

[ruby24]

6 minutes ago, magdalene said:

I have always suspected that some of those people you see on TV claiming to be still undecided voters are really Trump groupies playing possum. Or attention whores angling to get into a focus group.  Or lazy and/or just not very bright.  Because it's not like the two options are so much alike that you really would have to ponder "hmm, which way to go..." 

Pretty much this. There are no real undecideds anymore, there are people who are leaning one way or the other but for some reason don't want to say which, or are maybe people who wind up staying home.

Here's the thing- I said just two days ago that my annoyed fear was that Republicans might come back to Trump before Election Day anyway, instead of staying home, enough to make him a "normal loser" like McCain or Romney, with at least 45% of the vote. This whole Comey thing may give those people cover to do what they were going to do anyway. If it affects the polls at all.

I don't think it affects Hillary's vote in the slightest. But what I wanted more than anything was for this to be a massive repudiation of the worst presidential candidate in history, enough to tell him and the world that this is not who we are. I don't want him to lose like the last two losers, I want him under 40% of the vote (where's he's been in the polls for months, actually). And even then, what's sad is that he's going to win most red states anyway.

So, in the final days if this fucking FBI thing is what dominates the news, and for that reason Hillary's win is smaller than it might have been, costing her the Senate and letting Trump brag that someone as evil as him did better than the last two Republican nominees, I'm going to be very angry.

[candall]

47 minutes ago, needschocolate said:

 

I completely agree with you.  The point I was trying to make was that even if Comey explanation was legitimate, the way he wrote the letter show that he was biased, that there are ways he could have been less biased and more fair, but he didn't go that route.  

I understood you completely.    He shouldn't have written it at all, but since he did, he had infinite options for simply adding another sentence or two which would have made the announcement much less inflammatory.  Instead, he chose Molotov Cocktail mode.

[Padma]

I haven't been a big Harry Reid fan even though I've heard many insiders say "He's the guy you want to have your back in a fight." I never saw it until today, and now I freaking LOVE him!

Thank you, Senator, you're going out fighting the good fight in style:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/792846527811186689?p=v

And, maybe I'm just a crazy optimist, but I'm hoping--hoping!!!!--that the injustice of what Comey has done will motivate some of the quiet Republicans on the sidelines (George W. Bush, I'm looking at you!) to step up and tell Americans, "This man isn't fit to be your president."

Edited October 31, 2016 by Padma

[MulletorHater]

40 minutes ago, Keepitmoving said:

I love that old man Harry Reid, just something about him.  He would send a letter to Comey, LOL. His groggy, hoarse voice and battered up look, but he's still a boxer. When his face was busted up, but he was still talking shit, hilarious.  I was like damn, look at him, but he's still bitching in the mike about republicans. We need more of Reids and Pelosi's in the democratic party IMO. When his answer to Chris Matthews as to what won't he miss, was to look Matthews in the eye and say "you." Oh, love it.

For so long, I thought he was pretty ineffectual.  But, they say that a good boxer saves his best punch for last.  

It wouldn't surprise me if those Republicans who are NeverTrumpers are silently raising glasses of champagne.

[ruby24]

I was wondering if W would actually say anything. Is he the only living former president we haven't heard from? I'm sure he's not for Trump. I can't imagine him coming out for Hillary, but it'd be nice if he said something like Trump should never be president.

Nice for the news cycle of it anyway. It's not like anybody puts a lot of stock in W's judgment or anything, but as the one president we haven't heard from...the media would treat it as a huge deal.

Edited October 31, 2016 by ruby24

[KerleyQ]

The more I think about the whole "didn't have a warrant for those emails" aspect of this, the more it stinks to the high heavens.  So, presumably, the warrant issue is that they only had a warrant for AW's emails, postings, browsing, etc.  Which meant that they did not have a warrant to dig into Huma's emails.  So, they had the laptop because both used it, but they were only to focus on his activity, not hers.  But, it seems like someone explored a little to determine that these emails existed there.  The way this seems to be playing out is that Comey knew some of his agents had a laptop that belonged to one of Hillary's most trusted staff, and he made it known that, if they "happened to come across" anything from the State Department on there, he'd like to know about it.  And now he's obtained a warrant for something he already took and, likely read (I don't buy his "I don't know what's in them" BS).  This is all so shady.  

And then, there's the fact that these emails are not from Hillary, and they're not off her server.  So they have exactly what to do with an investigation into her use of a private server?  

The DNC has the same kind of media connections that the RNC has, I'm sure.  For some reason, they don't deploy them the same way the RNC does, and they have let the GOP control the narrative for far too long.  It's time to work those media connections in two ways.  First, use them to get out the counterpoint to Comey's BS, and to make sure that as many people as possible hear the truth - that these are not Hillary's emails and they're not off of her private server.  Add in that Comey has violated the standard of professional conduct in his position, along with the evidence that he colluded with Chaffetz and company.  Second, get the narrative focused on Trump's issues - Harry Reid's statement that the FBI has evidence tying Trump to Russia, the rape trial, the recently published accounts of the parties with underage models and drugs that Trump was involved in, the two instances where he paid bribes out of his charitable foundation to make investigations into his Trump U fraud go away, his refusal to pay small businesses for work on his projects (dig up some of those small business owners and put their faces on TV for interviews), and the effects his bankruptcies have had on the employees of those bankrupt projects (like the people who lost their jobs when his casino closed).  There is an avalanche of shit that you can dump on Trump's head, and it's time to do the dumping.  I know Michelle said "when they go low, we go high," but, sometimes, you've got to stop turning that other cheek.  This is the time to crouch down and play a little low.  

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, HumblePi said:

From what was said this morning on CNN, James Comey has a 10 year contract with the FBI, he was contracted in 2013 so he has 7 more years has left on that contract. Even if Donald Trump wins the election, James Comey will still have his job. The news also said that the FBI is extremely divided internally on this case, so James Comey will have to work very hard to bring his own people together and on the same page. He made an independent decision to go against longstanding Justice Department and FBI practice to not comment publicly about politically sensitive investigations within 60 days of an election.

Overall, the extension of this investigation into the emails of Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner is what's going to be investigated. Whether Huma risked compromising classified information sent by Hillary Clinton to her by sharing it with Anthony Weiner's laptop will be scrutinized.

If Comey really DID violate The Hatch Act, then his ass is out contract or not.

The act apparently has a lot to it, but the most relevant bit says (this is paraphrasing) that it violates the act to "use official authority or influence to interfere with an election"

If the Republicans win and nobody wants to go after him for that, then that doesn't stop him from voluntarily walking away to get public attention off the entire issue of the legitimacy of the election after this happened (which is what would happen if he was promises a Yoooge paying private sector job to do so).

Edited October 31, 2016 by Kromm

[Kromm]

25 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

Comey took an oath to reopen and inform Congress if there were new developments.  Can't wait to see what they've got!

As for the Hatch Act, this is straight out of the Clinton playbook:  Flashback to Bill vs Bush in 1992.

"Took an oath to inform congress"?

The FBI is not part of the legislative branch. They in fact are often responsible for investigations involving people in Congress. There is no connected duty there, and potentially a lot of conflicts of interest. 

The FBI is part of the Executive Branch. Loretta Lynch is LITERALLY (not figuratively) his boss. And he defied a direct order.

He is not some freedom fighter. He is a stooge buried in party politics who ignored a direct order, and released a vague accusation, before he even had a subpoena (and certainly any proof of linking to HRC). The Hatch Act is a real thing. It wasn't INVENTED by The Clintons. It's been law of the land for 77 years and has been upheld by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions.  And BEFORE the Hatch Act there was a similar thing (a regulation rather than a law) which went all the way back to THOMAS JEFFERSON's Administration.

It's empty talk to act like such a well established law is "Hillary's fault". Comey telegraphed his partisanship (what makes this a violation) with his OWN words pretty much in the memos he sent out on this.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Kromm

[Advance35]

That's what I don't get.  It's Huma's head that's in this noose technically.  IF anything is on that laptop, the FBI said in that letter that the laptop wasn't owned or used by Hillary.  It's Huma's.  So at worst, Hillary would have to fire her?

[Padma]

17 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

Comey took an oath to reopen and inform Congress if there were new developments.  Can't wait to see what they've got!

As for the Hatch Act, this is straight out of the Clinton playbook:  Flashback to Bill vs Bush in 1992.

As others have pointed out, his boss is the AG, not Jason Chaffetz, not even the American people. He works for the FBI, not Chaffetz, and the FBI conducts its investigations in secret until they are concluded. 

He apparently was trying to impress Republicans who were disappointed that a year long FBI investigation STILL found Clinton guilty of no crime (just like the Benghazi hearing). Frustrating for them, and apparently for him.

 "They found email that weren't from Clinton or her server and that we didn't have a warrant to read yet and don't know anything about" is not exactly a "new development".  (Non-development, yes). He was out of line--and I'd love to know WHY.

[Advance35]

And apparently NY FBI and DC FBI Offices are "The Jets" and "The Sharks".  *Shakes Head*

This has to be embarrassing for the ENTIRE organization.  And the reason for the stain on the FBI organization is Comey.

[sassykattt]

I just don't believe anyone who intends to vote is still undecided.  Standing in line and not sure?  Doesn't wish to disclose

[Landsnark]

46 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

Comey took an oath to reopen and inform Congress if there were new developments.

What does that mean?

 

46 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

As for the Hatch Act, this is straight out of the Clinton playbook:  Flashback to Bill vs Bush in 1992.

And as for this, this is precisely how the smear of Hillary continues and grows.  That sentence has no meaning.  It's three unrelated, meaningless clauses.  Underpinned by no facts, no evidence, no actual phenomena.  Just innuendo.  Innuendo innuendo innuendo, and voila!  It's "Crooked Hillary" because innuendo is all the casual public is familiar with, and it's fun for people like Joe Scarborough to scream about.  And so opinions are warped.  The narrative now is that she's a liar and a villain, yet she's never lied nor been villainous.
Furthermore, it deflects from the topic at hand.  It suggests that the real villain here is Hillary Clinton, because spurious allegation.  Please pay no attention to the violation of the Hatch Act that happened hours ago, don't you realize the real villain is Hillary Clinton because 1992?!!

Edited October 31, 2016 by Landsnark

[Kromm]

19 minutes ago, Landsnark said:

What does that mean?

And as for this, this is precisely how the smear of Hillary continues and grows.  That sentence has no meaning.  It's three unrelated, meaningless clauses.  Underpinned by no facts, no evidence, no actual phenomena.  Just innuendo.  Innuendo innuendo innuendo, and voila!  It's "Crooked Hillary" because innuendo is all the casual public is familiar with, and it's fun for people like Joe Scarborough to scream about.  And so opinions are warped.  The narrative now is that she's a liar and a villain, yet she's never lied nor been villainous.
Furthermore, it deflects from the topic at hand.  It suggests that the real villain here is Hillary Clinton, because spurious allegation.  Please pay no attention to the violation of the Hatch Act that happened hours ago, don't you realize the real villain is Hillary Clinton because 1992?!!

The way to analyze this is to uses the same kind of uber-simple questions a reporter does in their basic training!

Quote

As for the Hatch Act, this is straight out of the Clinton playbook

How?

Quote

Flashback to Bill vs Bush in 1992.

Why?

Quote

As for the Hatch Act

What?

I literally mean "what". "As for the Hatch Act" doesn't define WHAT is supposedly wrong with the Hatch Act. It implies it's somehow wrong, or invalid, but neglects to tell us what aspect of it is wrong.  Is this 70+ year old law, this 200+ year old executive order of Thomas Jefferson's a bogus practice somehow? What part of it? Be specific. Is it wrong because the entire idea of non-elected federal employees being non-partisan is wrong somehow? Is it wrong because telling a body you have no reporting responsibilities to in direct violation of not only tradition but direct orders from your boss is inherently a non-political act for "reasons" people will assert but won't explain? 

Edited October 31, 2016 by Kromm

[Captain Carrot]

I've tried to give Comey the benefit of the doubt. But it's not possible when you look at the facts that have come out over the weekend, and the people (from both parties) that have come out against his actions.

That being said, I don't think this will help Trump win, and I don't think it's intended to help him win. (They'll never admit it, but most Republicans probably want him to lose). I think this is intended to get enough Democrats to stay home that Republicans can retain control of the Senate. Whatever the reason it's a disgrace, and they need to remove Comey, to make sure people know what happens when people try to turn the FBI into a partisan organization.

[SyracuseMug]

Did Comey have the power to indict Hillary (or send the case to a grand jury) back in July? If he wanted to disrupt her campaign, I'm confused why he didn't go for it at the time. Unless he thought it was a better strategy to wait until now.

[ebk57]

3 minutes ago, SyracuseMug said:

Did Comey have the power to indict Hillary (or send the case to a grand jury) back in July? If he wanted to disrupt her campaign, I'm confused why he didn't go for it at the time. Unless he thought it was a better strategy to wait until now.

He couldn't do that because there was no actual evidence of wrongdoing.  As usual.  However, he did try to smear her as best he could at the time by calling her careless.   That's why I don't think he's acted with integrity at all.

[HumblePi]

I've found it difficult to separate what the facts are from what the conspiracy theories are since there's been so much cloak and dagger drama from James Comey. I've tried to get it simplified.

The FBI was investigating Anthony Weiner for sexting with an underage girl and during that investigation of his computer, they found there were a lot of emails sent to Huma Abedin. She must have used his computer at some point but 'ick'....that's my first thought. So she was accessing her emails from Hillary on his laptop for some reason.

The FBI has had this information for weeks, not days....weeks. Podesta said, He should have taken the first step of actually having looked at them before he did this in the middle of a campaign". Investigators saw enough of the emails to determine that they appeared pertinent to the previously completed investigation and that "they may be emails not previously reviewed." Investigators believe it's likely the newly recovered trove will include emails that were deleted from the Clinton server before the FBI took possession of it as part of that earlier investigation. So, it's the deleted emails that they're really searching for.

I see two outcomes here. Either the FBI has absolutely nothing but they bluff to influence the elections, or they are slowly cooking very damaging emails, to reveal them at the last days, very near elections to sink Hillary. For a minute, I had wondered how they will disclose something that would be so damaging to her yet still preserve the integrity of national security?  But I figured it out that hey don't care for the integrity or security of the nation, they're only protecting their own interests.

[Pixel]

38 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

In my opinion, Hillary should part ways with Huma--should have done that long ago.

Why? Huma hasn't done anything wrong. She should no more be blamed and victimized for her husband's transgressions than Hillary should be blamed for Bill's.  I've never heard of Huma being accused of any wrongdoing.  So why should Hillary part ways with her? Because it's fun to kick a woman when her personal life has fallen apart?

Edited October 31, 2016 by Pixel

[Padma]

4 minutes ago, Pixel said:

Why? Huma hasn't done anything wrong. She should no more be blamed and victimized for her husband's transgressions than Hillary should be blamed for Bill's.  I've never heard of Huma being accused of any wrongdoing.  So why should Hillary part ways with her? Because it's fun to kick a woman when her personal life has fallen apart?

I don't like to blame her--she takes so much s*** from the Republicans. But sharing a laptop with Anthony Weiner????!!!! Really, there are no words for how stupid that is, especially having her boss's email comingled with whatever he's doing. She works for two sensitive organizations--the U.S. State Dept and the Clinton Foundation/CGI.  That's already a bad optic, but handling their information so carelessly is actually very shocking to me, especially given her knowledge of what a compromised sleaze ball her husband is.

[Pixel]

3 minutes ago, Padma said:

I don't like to blame her--she takes so much s*** from the Republicans. But sharing a laptop with Anthony Weiner????!!!! Really, there are no words for how stupid that is, especially having her boss's email comingled with whatever he's doing. She works for two sensitive organizations--the U.S. State Dept and the Clinton Foundation/CGI.  That's already a bad optic, but handling their information so carelessly is actually very shocking to me, especially given her knowledge of what a compromised sleaze ball her husband is.

I understood it was the opposite. It was Huma's computer that Weiner used. 

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

From that article linked above. How Hillary Clinton Met Satan

Quote

She was nominated to her role not last July at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, but in 1992, when her husband destroyed the myth of Republican invincibility and Hillary Clinton was anointed the feminine face of evil.

Can I hear an Amen

3 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

Huma has been careless with State Department emails (confidential, classified material) by forwarding them to the private server and her Yahoo email account. Besides her husband, there's a chance others have seen that information.  I wouldn't trust Huma at all.

If that is what happened, I don't know why it is tied to HRC's server use. Which is what the investigation was about.

[Keepitmoving]

35 minutes ago, ebk57 said:

He couldn't do that because there was no actual evidence of wrongdoing.  As usual.  However, he did try to smear her as best he could at the time by calling her careless.   That's why I don't think he's acted with integrity at all.

Not only this, his role is only to recommend indictment, it's Loretta Lynch's office who decides whether to actually follow through on his department's recommendation. She  could accept his recommendations or follow through with indictment even if he recommended against it or vice versa. That's why Lynch always stated that she would follow through with whatever his dept.. recommended, she's the one with the ultimate power and final say here.  I also don't think she's  suppose to know the particulars of the case until the FBI is ready to present their findings to her department, so she shouldn't have had any information to share with Slick Willy on that plane since she wasn't the one investigating it.  Apparently, Comey is just another man, white man of power at that, who can't handle a woman having that power over him, much less a woman of color, so he decided to take his petulant ass right over her head. 

Edited October 31, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[Kromm]

44 minutes ago, 1kittykitty said:

Given her longtime connection to Bill and her recent timely covert meeting with him on the tarmac, I don't think Loretta Lynch is objective when it comes to Hillary.  Her gender and ethnicity have nothing to do with it. Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I doubt Comey acted independently when he previously didn't recommend an indictment.

Your opinion doesn't trump the law (pun not intended but still funny).

Neither you, nor Comey gets to decide that his boss, according the laws of the nation, STOPS being his boss simply because he (or you) decide that Loretta Lynch has met Bill Clinton and you don't like it.

Neither you, nor Comey gets to decide that Congress has spontaneously BECOME his boss.

He is technically a lawman. That means he enforces the laws, he doesn't get to make them up or decide on his own when to break them. 

If there is some "problem" with the Attorney General, it's the job of the Congress to address that. But until such is charged and proven, the AG acts independent of Congress, and the FBI Director, under the law, reports to her and only her. 

[shok]

3 hours ago, 1kittykitty said:

Huma has been careless with State Department emails (confidential, classified material) by forwarding them to the private server and her Yahoo email account. Besides her husband, there's a chance others have seen that information.  I wouldn't trust Huma at all.

The emails contain confidential classified material? You know that how? Even Comey has no idea what emails are on the computer. You should contact him and let him know that you magically know what they contain so he can call off his team of agents who are going through them all now. Save them lots of time and money.

 

2 hours ago, 1kittykitty said:

Given her longtime connection to Bill and her recent timely covert meeting with him on the tarmac, I don't think Loretta Lynch is objective when it comes to Hillary. 

Covert meeting? How could it be covert when it was completely out in the open on the tarmac of a public airport and there was press all around who dutifully reported on it? Maybe you don't know the meaning of the word covert. If Bill wanted to have a covert meeting with her, he could have just phoned her and arranged to meet her in her office which is in the same building as Hillary's campaign headquarters in NY.

[BW Manilowe]

7 hours ago, ruby24 said:

I was wondering if W would actually say anything. Is he the only living former president we haven't heard from? I'm sure he's not for Trump. I can't imagine him coming out for Hillary, but it'd be nice if he said something like Trump should never be president.

Nice for the news cycle of it anyway. It's not like anybody puts a lot of stock in W's judgment or anything, but as the one president we haven't heard from...the media would treat it as a huge deal.

I believe it's already been stated that all of the former (living, of course--which would be Carter, Bush 41, Clinton 42 [I'm already distinguishing between the Clintons as POTUSes, in preparation for the way I voted & what I hope is to come], & Bush 43 ) presidents (& Obama, for that matter) have said quite clearly, in their own ways, that Donald Trump is unfit to be President.

[shok]

15 minutes ago, BW Manilowe said:

I believe it's already been stated that all of the former (living, of course--which would be Carter, Bush 41, Clinton 42 [I'm already distinguishing between the Clintons as POTUSes, in preparation for the way I voted & what I hope is to come], & Bush 43 ) presidents (& Obama, for that matter) have said quite clearly, in their own ways, that Donald Trump is unfit to be President.

And, except for W, have all said they're voting for Hillary. W hasn't specifically said but Laura and the two daughters pretty much have said they're voting for her.

[BW Manilowe]

2 minutes ago, shok said:

And, except for W, have all said they're voting for Hillary. W hasn't specifically said but Laura and the two daughters pretty much have said they're voting for her.

I don't think most of the male Bushes (POTUS 41 or Jeb), or even former FLOTUS Barbara Bush, have said who they're voting for; just that they, like the other former POTUSes, many other Republicans, & President Obama don't support Trump or feel he's Presidential material & they didn't seem willing to commit to voting for Hillary either. Except, I don't think W--Bush 43--has actually spoken on the record about the issue because, when he left office, I remember he made some promise to stay out of how Obama ran things & to otherwise keep as low a public profile as possible; his repudiation of Trump is more implied/presumed because of other comments regarding Trump's candidacy by his family members.

[Miss Dee]

Think about that a minute...is that logical? With loads of press outside, Bill and Lynch told them "Don't want any cameras, stay away!" and then proceeded to have a secret meeting with covert and possibly illegal stuff going on? Isn't that kind of like a seven year old doing something naughty in their bedroom so they shout out,  "Don't come in here, Mom!"?

In other words, why would they plan to talk about illegal things in that situation and then proceed to lampshade it by telling the press not to listen in?! It's asinine.

[Miss Dee]

So the Clintons are simultaneously stupid enough to do dumb shit like that, but clever enough to do all kinds of illegal stuff over the years and never have enough actual evidence to convict them despite all the attempts to do so over the years? That doesn't make sense as a theory. You (general you) can't change the personalities of the people involved to suit your accusation at the time.

[BW Manilowe]

It appears the NBC Nightly News Tweet(s) only include pics of parts of Senator Reid's letter to Comey. If you haven't yet read the entire original 2-page letter, & just saw the parts quoted in NBC's pics, you really need to read the entire original document. You can read the whole thing here--it was uploaded as a PDF file. Your phone (at least if it's an iPhone) should open it automatically, though I'm not sure if that includes Android phones. You might need PDF Reader software for it on Android phones, tablets/iPads, & you probably will need PDF Reader software for it on laptops/notebooks & desktops.

http://www.reid.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Letter-to-Director-Comey-10_30_2016.pdf

Edited October 31, 2016 by BW Manilowe
To add something.

[33kaitykaity]

3 minutes ago, BW Manilowe said:

It appears the NBC Nightly News Tweet(s) only include pics of parts of Senator Reid's letter to Comey. If you haven't yet read the entire original 2-page letter, & just saw the parts quoted in NBC's pics, you really need to read the entire original document. You can read the whole thing here--it was uploaded as a PDF file. Your phone (at least if it's an iPhone) should open it automatically, though I'm not sure if that includes Android phones. You might need PDF Reader software for it on tablets/iPads, & you probably will need PDF Reader software for it on laptops/notebooks & desktops.

http://www.reid.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Letter-to-Director-Comey-10_30_2016.pdf

Absolutely agree, it's a must-read.  I posted the text itself over in the Peanut Gallery thread as well.