WWTBAM Bored

Its an opinion piece, but with significant street cred.

Grifters In Chief

So many good lines to quote, I almost have to quote the entire thing. But to summarize:

A Hillary Clinton presidency will be built, from the ground up, on self-dealing, crony favors, and an utter disregard for the law.

the Clintons do not draw any lines between their “charitable” work, their political activity, their government jobs or (and most important) their personal enrichment.

The memo removes any doubt that the foundation is little more than an unregistered super PAC working on the Clintons’ behalf. Donors to the charity are simultaneously tapped to give Bill speech requests and other business arrangements, including the $3.5 million he was paid annually to serve as “honorary chairman” of Laureate International Universities.

Any nonprofit lawyer in America knows the ironclad rule of keeping private enrichment away from tax-exempt activity, for the simple reason that mixing the two involves ripping off taxpayers. Every election lawyer in the country lives in fear of stepping over the lines governing fundraising and election vehicles. The Clintons recognize no lines.

And my favorite...

Any one who pulls the lever for Mrs. Clinton takes responsibility for setting up the nation for all the blatant corruption that will follow.

Of course, this is all smoke, no fire, no conviction or even criminal charges, so no big deal to certain Hillary supporters here. And it came from Wikileaks, so it is further suspect. However, even the FBI finds enough smoke in the Wikileaks they they are reopening their investigations into her email server scandal.

Nothing blatantly illegal (like Foundation money diverted to the campaign) but certainly sleazy. And I have no doubt that donors to the Foundation, campaign and "Bill Clinton Inc." expect to get perks like invitations to State dinners and (now we're getting very close to illegal) opportunities to lobby Clinton Administration officials.

jarnon wrote:Nothing blatantly illegal (like Foundation money diverted to the campaign) but certainly sleazy. And I have no doubt that donors to the Foundation, campaign and "Bill Clinton Inc." expect to get perks like invitations to State dinners and (now we're getting very close to illegal) opportunities to lobby Clinton Administration officials.

Like Bob said, she's smart!

BackInTex wrote: Of course, this is all smoke, no fire, no conviction or even criminal charges, so no big deal to certain Hillary supporters here. And it came from Wikileaks, so it is further suspect. However, even the FBI finds enough smoke in the Wikileaks they they are reopening their investigations into her email server scandal.

As usual, BiT, Trump, and all the usual suspects leap before they look.

The FBI is not reopening the investigation into Hillary's e-mails. They did seize a number of computers belonging to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin in their investigation of him for sexting a 15-year-old. They are reviewing e-mails on those computers to see if they contain classified information and whether anything in them might affect their earlier investigation into Hillary's servers. They would be remiss not to check Huma's e-mails to see if they contain any classified information from Hillary, but that's a far cry from saying they are reopening the investigation into Hillary.

I can live with sleazy but can't stomach the thought of a Buffoon in Chief.

jaybee wrote:I can live with sleazy but can't stomach the thought of a Buffoon in Chief.

I guess we differ there. I think Clowns are entertaining. Snakes are deadly. I'd rather be entertained.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote: Of course, this is all smoke, no fire, no conviction or even criminal charges, so no big deal to certain Hillary supporters here. And it came from Wikileaks, so it is further suspect. However, even the FBI finds enough smoke in the Wikileaks they they are reopening their investigations into her email server scandal.

As usual, BiT, Trump, and all the usual suspects leap before they look.

The FBI is not reopening the investigation into Hillary's e-mails. They did seize a number of computers belonging to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin in their investigation of him for sexting a 15-year-old. They are reviewing e-mails on those computers to see if they contain classified information and whether anything in them might affect their earlier investigation into Hillary's servers. They would be remiss not to check Huma's e-mails to see if they contain any classified information from Hillary, but that's a far cry from saying they are reopening the investigation into Hillary.

Jim Comey wrote:Of course, we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations, but here I feel an obligation to do so given that I testified repeatedly in recent months that our investigation was completed.

1) Confirms he is telling Congress about an ongoing investigation
2) because he said the investigation was complete

Either it is complete thus not needing to tell Congress about it being "ongoing" or it is "open". But it was complete so the only way it could be open is that is was re-opened.

Nowhere does he indicate the "ongoing investigation" is not the "completed investigation". If they are not the same, then the above well thought out and written sentence makes no sense.

Hard for me to agree that a publication owned by Murdoch is a real news source. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:Hard for me to agree that a publication owned by Murdoch is a real news source. --Bob

Your primary source for "evidence" is the Washington Post. I'll put the Wall Street Journal's credibility, independence, and significance up against the comPost anytime.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote: Of course, this is all smoke, no fire, no conviction or even criminal charges, so no big deal to certain Hillary supporters here. And it came from Wikileaks, so it is further suspect. However, even the FBI finds enough smoke in the Wikileaks they they are reopening their investigations into her email server scandal.

As usual, BiT, Trump, and all the usual suspects leap before they look.

The FBI is not reopening the investigation into Hillary's e-mails. They did seize a number of computers belonging to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin in their investigation of him for sexting a 15-year-old. They are reviewing e-mails on those computers to see if they contain classified information and whether anything in them might affect their earlier investigation into Hillary's servers. They would be remiss not to check Huma's e-mails to see if they contain any classified information from Hillary, but that's a far cry from saying they are reopening the investigation into Hillary.

Here is the actual letter from Comey to Congress. I'll paraphrase. We told you before that we were done. We just found out that there's some more stuff. We have no idea whether it means anything but I guess I need to let you know that we're not done after all. --Bob

BackInTex wrote:

jaybee wrote:I can live with sleazy but can't stomach the thought of a Buffoon in Chief.

I guess we differ there. I think Clowns are entertaining. Snakes are deadly. I'd rather be entertained.

That would be fine if we were talking about a reality TV program, or opinions on an internet message board. But we're not.

There is no question that Trump is completely inept in many necessary 'presidential' skills. He goes with the salesmans bluster of better to do something than nothing and hope for a win. I actually could go along with that, as it often works. But he has to be smart enough to recognize his limitations and take advice - which he doesn't. As long as he is in the world of "Nobody knows more than me at ...." or "I am the only one who can ..." he will not be an effective President - he will be an idiot. An idiot running our country will be more deadly than any snake.

And I really do not like HRC either. I'm definitely more of a conservative Republican than liberal Democrat and can really only think of a short list of people who who could run for President that would make me vote for Hillary. Sadly, Trump is on that list.

No matter who wins in a couple of weeks, the Republican party as we know it is toast. At least it has four years to get it's shit together. Hopefully it can.

"I'm not crazy about Hillary but I'm not crazy."

Bob78164 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote: Of course, this is all smoke, no fire, no conviction or even criminal charges, so no big deal to certain Hillary supporters here. And it came from Wikileaks, so it is further suspect. However, even the FBI finds enough smoke in the Wikileaks they they are reopening their investigations into her email server scandal.

As usual, BiT, Trump, and all the usual suspects leap before they look.

The FBI is not reopening the investigation into Hillary's e-mails. They did seize a number of computers belonging to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin in their investigation of him for sexting a 15-year-old. They are reviewing e-mails on those computers to see if they contain classified information and whether anything in them might affect their earlier investigation into Hillary's servers. They would be remiss not to check Huma's e-mails to see if they contain any classified information from Hillary, but that's a far cry from saying they are reopening the investigation into Hillary.

Here is the actual letter from Comey to Congress. I'll paraphrase. We told you before that we were done. We just found out that there's some more stuff. We have no idea whether it means anything but I guess I need to let you know that we're not done after all. --Bob

And today he walked-back the letter saying he shouldn't have implied there was any connection to Hillary's closed investigation.

Bob Juch wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
As usual, BiT, Trump, and all the usual suspects leap before they look.

The FBI is not reopening the investigation into Hillary's e-mails. They did seize a number of computers belonging to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin in their investigation of him for sexting a 15-year-old. They are reviewing e-mails on those computers to see if they contain classified information and whether anything in them might affect their earlier investigation into Hillary's servers. They would be remiss not to check Huma's e-mails to see if they contain any classified information from Hillary, but that's a far cry from saying they are reopening the investigation into Hillary.

Here is the actual letter from Comey to Congress. I'll paraphrase. We told you before that we were done. We just found out that there's some more stuff. We have no idea whether it means anything but I guess I need to let you know that we're not done after all. --Bob

And today he walked-back the letter saying he shouldn't have implied there was any connection to Hillary's closed investigation.

I can't find that. Cite, please. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Here is the actual letter from Comey to Congress. I'll paraphrase. We told you before that we were done. We just found out that there's some more stuff. We have no idea whether it means anything but I guess I need to let you know that we're not done after all. --Bob

And today he walked-back the letter saying he shouldn't have implied there was any connection to Hillary's closed investigation.

I can't find that. Cite, please. --Bob

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 14f6b6e3a5

Bob Juch wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: And today he walked-back the letter saying he shouldn't have implied there was any connection to Hillary's closed investigation.

I can't find that. Cite, please. --Bob

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 14f6b6e3a5

1)"Today he walked back....." would imply the "today" of your post, Saturday October 29. Your link is to something written on Friday. I know the Washington Posts makes up a lot of stuff but the fact they can time travel is not one of them.

2) He didn't walk anything back.

BackInTex wrote:1)"Today he walked back....." would imply the "today" of your post, Saturday October 29. Your link is to something written on Friday. I know the Washington Posts makes up a lot of stuff but the fact they can time travel is not one of them.

2) He didn't walk anything back.

I agree that he didn't walk anything back. But given the news stories that they haven't even seen the e-mails, together with the reminder that his original testimony said that they would look again if they received more information, there was nothing misleading about his original testimony and his letter, sent in contravention of official DoJ policy, was way out of line. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:1)"Today he walked back....." would imply the "today" of your post, Saturday October 29. Your link is to something written on Friday. I know the Washington Posts makes up a lot of stuff but the fact they can time travel is not one of them.

2) He didn't walk anything back.

I agree that he didn't walk anything back. But given the news stories that they haven't even seen the e-mails, together with the reminder that his original testimony said that they would look again if they received more information, there was nothing misleading about his original testimony and his letter, sent in contravention of official DoJ policy, was way out of line. --Bob

The FBI has had this computer for some time but they only got a search warrant for it today. It would seem the more prudent course would have been to get the search warrant and at least find out to what extent this information was duplicative of e-mails they already had. From what I've heard, a decent document discovery program like major law firms use in complex civil cases could produce whatever genuinely suspicious e-mails there were within a few days (and still might if the FBI decides to do so now).

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:1)"Today he walked back....." would imply the "today" of your post, Saturday October 29. Your link is to something written on Friday. I know the Washington Posts makes up a lot of stuff but the fact they can time travel is not one of them.

2) He didn't walk anything back.

I agree that he didn't walk anything back. But given the news stories that they haven't even seen the e-mails, together with the reminder that his original testimony said that they would look again if they received more information, there was nothing misleading about his original testimony and his letter, sent in contravention of official DoJ policy, was way out of line. --Bob

The FBI has had this computer for some time but they only got a search warrant for it today. It would seem the more prudent course would have been to get the search warrant and at least find out to what extent this information was duplicative of e-mails they already had. From what I've heard, a decent document discovery program like major law firms use in complex civil cases could produce whatever genuinely suspicious e-mails there were within a few days (and still might if the FBI decides to do so now).

That doesn't even matter to me. For me, the basis for saying anything (contrary to DoJ policy) about an investigation before it's complete is the possibility that his earlier Congressional testimony was inaccurate, and therefore required correction. It wasn't. He was clearly asked whether they'd look into it more if they received new information and he said that they would. That removes his only excuse (as far as I'm concerned) for making a public announcement.

Now that he's done so, he needs to mitigate the unfair damage by doing as Secretary Clinton asked and releasing a clear and thorough statement of exactly what the FBI does and doesn't know. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:he needs to mitigate the unfair damage by doing as Secretary Clinton asked and releasing a clear and thorough statement of exactly what the FBI does and doesn't know. --Bob

Talk about damaging....I wish the FBI would tell all they know about the Clintons.

Glenn Reynolds in USAToday http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... /93006320/

To paraphrase Bernie Sanders, real Americans are sick and tired of hearing about her damn e-mails.

But I live in Ohio and I already early-voted for Hillary two weeks ago, so it's not like this non-story has any effect on me.

Then again, there was nothing in Hillary's e-mails anyway that would make me sell out my soul and support the flaming paper bag of dog crap left on my front porch Donald Drumpf.

Pastor Fireball wrote:To paraphrase Bernie Sanders, real Americans are sick and tired of hearing about her damn e-mails.

But I live in Ohio and I already early-voted for Hillary two weeks ago, so it's not like this non-story has any effect on me.

Then again, there was nothing in Hillary's e-mails anyway that would make me sell out my soul and support the flaming paper bag of dog crap left on my front porch Donald Drumpf.

That's what scares me. You wouldn't care if Hillary turns out to be the Manchurian Candidate.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Pastor Fireball wrote:To paraphrase Bernie Sanders, real Americans are sick and tired of hearing about her damn e-mails.

But I live in Ohio and I already early-voted for Hillary two weeks ago, so it's not like this non-story has any effect on me.

Then again, there was nothing in Hillary's e-mails anyway that would make me sell out my soul and support the flaming paper bag of dog crap left on my front porch Donald Drumpf.

That's what scares me. You wouldn't care if Hillary turns out to be the Manchurian Candidate.

Ironic remark, given that Trump pretty much is. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:Ironic remark, given that Trump pretty much is. --Bob

Coming from someone who supports the administration that gave $400 million in cash to world's largest sponsor of terrorism, a country that consistently calls for our destruction, and an administration, and State Department run by your candidate, that gave control of a large portion of our uranium assets over to the Soviets.

Yeah, Trump is the biggest risk.

And before you go all "..world court decided.." on me. 1) Screw the world court 2) We didn't have to give it in cash.