I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

In 2008, she and Bill behaved like petulant children when Obama became a serious challenger.

How "petulant" and "childish" of her to want to win a campaign.

And then having lost, what a hissy-fit she had by refusing to work with the guy who beat her ever again.

And her taking on all of Bernie's positions, and basically plagiarizing his speeches

Which is exactly what Bernie wanted... How dare she.

There's very little daylight between Hillary's and Bill Kristol's foreign policy.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

They're both corrupt.

By your lights, who in politics isn't?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

I'm sure there are mildly embarrassing things in the CGI's emails. There are in literally every orgs.

I once was involved in a case where a company run by a two people who were engaged had to have all of its email over a two year period subjected to discovery. One of the two had a proclivities to affairs on the side. The other had a proclivity to long, intense discussions about theoretical mathematics. Myself and a litigator spent a weekend with paralegals coming to us with their emails asking if we cared.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You keep waiting for that pile-on. I'm hearing crickets. (But I've no doubt, some fool will bite sooner or later and give you an 'atta boy... at least one always does.)

Almost everything you post is ridiculous, but I think this is your best work. Got yourself covered either way. You sure outmaneuvered him! If no one backs him up, you win. If someone agrees, they're a fool. Check and mate.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Again, that you're crediting right-wing bullshit doesn't help you look any better here.

That's not right wing bullshit. Her surrogates destroyed 30,000 emails. You know civil litigation. Imagine the spoliation arguments in a case where that happens. The inference against the party destroying them would be enormous.

If you've been in the position to have done something like this, you know - no order to do so is ever given from the top. It's implied. It's what occurs when you are engaged in an enterprise where the people who can get rid of paper trails understand the need to do so while preserving plausible deniability for the people at the top.

We'll never know for sure, but his statement seems clear... Comey didn't have enough of a case to win because he couldn't find intent. The email destruction could have been an honest error. But the facts in total indicate the fingerprints of people - lawyers, mostly - who understand, when facing the high criminal burden of proof, it's better to argue over why evidence was destroyed than the evidence. There is no inference of guilt in criminal case such as hers would be without a charge for some predicate criminal act. (See Frank Quattrone's saga through the justice system involving a collateral destruction of evidence charge).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Almost everything you post is ridiculous, but I think this is your best work. Got yourself covered either way. You sure outmaneuvered him! If no one backs him up, you win. If someone agrees, they're a fool. Check and mate.

TM

If a thing works, use it. Whatever deters from a boring identity-politics based discussion.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

She's too pure a politician. She stands for nothing.

There you go again. Bullshit.

Just as an example, we know she's cared deeply about childhood education from the time she wrote her senior paper in college. Obama wrote books about himself; she wrote a book about childhood education. At every step of her career she's been a champion for child-ed. Can you name any politician other than her as closely tied to child ed issues?

It's one example.

And I know. White men never give a shit about early education issues. It doesn't ring their bell. But it's an area that she owns that matters deeply.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

And her taking on all of Bernie's positions, and basically plagiarizing his speeches, knowing full well she's going to give his followers nothing?

You mean doing exactly what Bernie was going to do? Overpromise on shit that can't be delivered? Bernie wanted to push her left, she moves left, and now she's doing it "knowing full well she's going to give his followers nothing?" You are brain dead. She is not the king. If a bill reached her desk that made any sense at all on any of the policies Bernie got her to adopt, she'd sign it. But everyone except you and the dumbest of Bernie's followers know that the current and future Congress will not allow it.

Whatever. This shit is pointless.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

How "petulant" and "childish" of her to want to win a campaign.

She and Bill acted entitled. Fuck them.

And then having lost, what a hissy-fit she had by refusing to work with the guy who beat her ever again.

She demanded he give her the post. It was a trade. And he fucking hates them.

Which is exactly what Bernie wanted... How dare she.

Right. Bernie wanted his material used to defraud his followers.

You're still not getting the pile-on.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You mean doing exactly what Bernie was going to do? Overpromise on shit that can't be delivered? Bernie wanted to push her left, she moves left, and now she's doing it "knowing full well she's going to give his followers nothing?" You are brain dead. She is not the king. If a bill reached her desk that made any sense at all on any of the policies Bernie got her to adopt, she'd sign it. But everyone except you and the dumbest of Bernie's followers know that the current and future Congress will not allow it.

Whatever. This shit is pointless.

TM

She's not even going to try. And TPP's coming. Bernie was for naught. Hillary understands just how short the attention span of the average American is, and she's not even going to pay lip service to the left positions she took.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's not right wing bullshit. Her surrogates destroyed 30,000 emails. You know civil litigation. Imagine the spoliation arguments in a case where that happens. The inference against the party destroying them would be enormous.

If you've been in the position to have done something like this, you know - no order to do so is ever given from the top. It's implied. It's what occurs when you are engaged in an enterprise where the people who can get rid of paper trails understand the need to do so while preserving plausible deniability for the people at the top.

The fact that you jump to the worst case scenario is all the evidence anyone needs to know that the constant refrain of Hillary's corruption has worked on you. The simplest explanation is that she doesn't want to have every single email she wrote studied for the next 5 years and each nasty thing she said about the left, the right, Obama, the Pope, Putin, Cameron, Merkle, whoever released and held up for everyone to see. And it seems reasonable to believe that she knew she'd be subject to this level of scrutiny based on her 30 years experience going through the right's same bullshit at every level.

TM

[Flinty_McFlint]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Oh yeah, keep it coming! Today's Daily Dose is Richard 'Groove' Holmes with "Groovin' For Mr. G." Beastie Boys fans may recognize the name as the inspiration for their track "Groove Holmes." Dig it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yLJU6j_YEc

I listened to this all yesterday at work (or whatever the youtube playlist auto-selected for me), thanks. Also, I saw what you did there a while ago with the oxford comma reference. It might be the only music reference I'd ever understand from you, being the musical plebe I am.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

She and Bill acted entitled. Fuck them.



She demanded he give her the post. It was a trade. And he fucking hates them.



Right. Bernie wanted his material used to defraud his followers.



You're still not getting the pile-on.

You use it to pull so much bullshit out of, how do you keep your ass from getting sore?

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

There you go again. Bullshit.

Just as an example, we know she's cared deeply about childhood education from the time she wrote her senior paper in college. Obama wrote books about himself; she wrote a book about childhood education. At every step of her career she's been a champion for child-ed. Can you name any politician other than her as closely tied to child ed issues?

It's one example.

And I know. White men never give a shit about early education issues. It doesn't ring their bell. But it's an area that she owns that matters deeply.

Fair enough. So she cares about childhood education. And she cares about health care reform.

Where it matters - economic issues - she cares about campaign contributions.

And on foreign policy, she cares about a set of policies that conveniently benefit the defense industry. She cares about interventionism. By extension, she doesn't care much about wasting American lives.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You use it to pull so much bullshit out of, how do you keep your ass from getting sore?

TM

Obama detests them. He's just protecting his legacy, and views Trump as a serious danger.