There is some evidence that mainstream voters are really turned off by the Democrats constant hysterical screaming. I wonder if Trump is cleverly exploiting this.
BTW, does anyone else find it weird that Hillary forwarded her emails to other people for printing? Is she too stupid to know how to use a printer?
“Is she too stupid to know how to use a printer?”
Is this a rhetorical question? LOL
” does anyone find it weird that Hillary forwarded her e-mails to other people for printing?” maybe it was a way to get the information to people that shouldn’t have it.
Since the bill of particulars against Comey includes disclosure of derogatory information about someone not being charged, one would think Frau
Blucher’sHillary’s lemmings would be pleased. My guess is that Comey’s closing arguments press conference immunizes HRC from charges as the jury pool has been tainted.Of course, lefties are never pleased. Once they’ve laid waste to a village, the angry mob is off to destroy the next one.
Can’t Hillary and Barry just go away?
“There is some evidence that mainstream voters are really turned off by the Democrats constant hysterical screaming.”
Sane voters, yes.
IIUC, computers holding classified information are isolated so that the contents cannot be printed or otherwise removed. So forwarding the emails was, indeed, a way to get the information to people who shouldn’t have it.
Each email sent was, by itself, a separate crime. If Hillary or Abedin sent, say, ten emails, they could be prosecuted for ten violations of the law. And could be sentenced for each offense.
But none of that matters to the left. You’re just picking on poor Hillary because she’s a woman.
Comey was fired because he said mean (or wrong) things about Hilary? Really? Not likely. The obvious possibility: Comey was getting uncomfortably close on investigating a Russian connection. 18 days of unfired Flynn.. Comey had to go. The President needs a lap-poodle to be head of that investigation. Nothing to see here. It is all perfectly normal …
Cas, that makes no sense. First, according to Democrat/Left mythology, Comey is supposed to be pro-Trump and an enemy of Hillary – remember?
Second, the FBI Director doesn’t investigate. He’s way above it. Especially nowadays, the actual investigators would keep plenty of records on an important investigation, so firing the Director would be the exact wrong way to suppress it. It’s more likely (though still unlikely – I am making a point about the unlikelihood of your suggestion, here) for Comey himself to be a Russian agent.
Seriously – Fauxcohontas is out there claiming that Comey was fired because of the Russians, so I can see why the notion circulated to you, but… It’s utterly. illogical.
It can’t be true, simultaneously, that 1) Hillary lost because Comey was out to wound her on Trump’s behalf, and 2) Comey is an effective, impartial FBI Director whom we should keep. At least one of those must be false. (More likely, both.)
Only obvious to the InfoWars wing of the Democrat left. I mean really, it’s becoming almost as absurd as the theory that the purported moon landings were the product of an elaborate Hollywood backlot production. Again, should this be true, where’s the evidence? (And sorry, but “It’s all classified!” isn’t going to work.)
Former Director Comey misrepresented basic facts in his testimony to Congress. And that was only last week’s misstep. It’s akin to the NASA director misstating the number of exploration projects currently active. If you’re the head of an agency, you should know that stuff. To me, it’s obvious that he was trying to hold on to his job while not ticking anyone off. Sorry, but if you’re the head of one of the top law enforcement agencies you’re going to tick someone off. The key is to not tick everyone off in sequence or only tick off those whom someone else in government wants you to at a given time. He obviously couldn’t finesse those points which caused him to make inaccurate and puzzling statements. He must have really liked his job in order to do that, or else was so confident of his abilities he couldn’t see where he was screwing up. In either case, that’s not the type of person you want at the helm of an important agency, particularly one which is supposed to be functionally independent.
I used to, yes. But as the stories came out about her technology use, not so much.
When she last worked in a law office, MS-DOS was still in wide usage and Windows 3.1 was the fresh new thing. I could probably win bets by stating that legal documents at the Rose Law Firm were then drafted in WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS. But regardless, that type of interaction with computers was something for paralegal and legal secretaries to fuss with. (Besides, who, other than little people, have the patience to wait for a document to print out on a laser printer with 128-256K of memory?) After she moved on up to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, there was little need to interact with technology; there were social secretaries and a steno pool and so forth to handle that. Ditto with being a US Senator. As the rise of personal mobile technology became more common, she was introduced to that and became functionally operational with devices which did a limited amount of things, but even then routinely misplaced several devices.
I serve on a governing board of a county-funded public agency and our current board chair is a retired geologist/engineer who has his wife view and print out his board-related e-mail messages and has, only since he began his term, learned how to respond to e-mail on his own (largely thanks to the generous assistance of personnel at the local community college). I only found out a couple weeks ago that he’s 12 years older than Hillary (I assumed he was only about half a dozen older than HRC).
Just yesterday, on a transportation-related forum I’m a member of, there was a discussion about the disappearance of ticketing kiosks in various places and how that’s related to the advent and rise of e-ticketing. The thread discussion quickly veered into the ability of the older generation to cope with/use technology and how they will manage trends like truly paperless e-ticketing (and in the future, totally paperless boarding passes). One poster noted how his father worked with computers in his job, but after retirement has trouble navigating simple tasks—like printing documents from a home computer. In a recent call to family tech support, the son found out that the reason his father couldn’t print stuff was because the default printer was set to Microsoft OneNote and he couldn’t/didn’t realize he needed to select the correct printer from the drop-down dialog box. This same older parent can navigate an iPad just fine—but doesn’t want his son to update the OS or the apps. It works fine just as long as nothing changes.
So yeah, after the stuff I’ve learned about HRC in the past year, I totally believe she needs assistance to print out documents as someone who has almost never used a personal computer. She probably is totally uncomfortable with reading PDF files on her iPad, too, and instead will insist they be printed out for her. Yet she’s not alone, as it was also pointed out in the previous election cycle that the now-POTUS, though famous for his Twitter proficiency, doesn’t use e-mail and rarely interacts with a personal computer. (Again, following his career trajectory, much like HRC, he has never really needed to.)
Is she stupid? Well, not in being functionally technologically illiterate. I have a friend who is a special education teacher with two Masters degrees who can navigate a PC just fine most of the time, particularly at school; but the smallest thing that goes awry with her home computer sends her into a tizzy. It appears that if you didn’t grow up with computers or didn’t develop an affinity for them as they came into everyday life, you are going to have more issues and more recalcitrance about integrating them into your life. The fun stories (promoted by organizations like AARP) about senior citizens who are designing WWW pages and teaching their young pre-school grandchildren about the wonders of computers are really the exception to the norm, much like the first graders who can perform piano concertos.
There are many things to criticize about someone with a law degree who engages in the behaviors and the insularity which HRC does (particularly when compared with the several decades-older UK Head Of State who drove herself home from church two days ago—something the person who aspired to be the leader of the free world hasn’t herself done in several decades). But her failure to relate to modern technology in the same way much of society does makes her paradoxically more relatable, and dare I say–ironically enough–more human.
Of course, lefties are never pleased. Once they’ve laid waste to a village, they complain about the mess and demand that the government clean it up.
Another point to make you go “Hmmmm…”
Comey “misspoke” about the number of emails forwarded to Weiner. There were, in fact, fewer than was claimed.
But…
Weiner was found with many, many emails on his laptop.
So, either there were more emails forwarded than disclosed, or he got them from another source. Which, of course, brings up the question, “Why was he getting them?” In the meantime, though, the issue of Weiner having them is now effectively dead.
The fact that Comey could not get this important fact right, thus sending the right wing into a tizzy about thousands of forwarded emails for a day, is more than enough reason to fire him. He was a obstruction to justice.
Computers cripple me. But, like Hillary, I have immediate access to an I.T. guy. Hillary had access to multiple, 24/7 I.T. guys.
My banker lady has a printer in her office. She sends it a job and it prints away. Beyond loading paper, she is as dumb as me about how it works.
Over at Lowe’s, knuckleheads find stuff in other stores, order it, and print out paperwork for me to use at the checkout.
Hillary had a SCIF in her home. The Secret Service had an I.T. guy assigned to her. I can only imagine how the Department of State handles all the classified stuff.
When Hillary asked Huma to print something, that is nearly transparent code for “don’t leave any electronic fingerprints on the in-house system.” Huma could use her iPhone to photograph papers and send the photos to designated printer in Anthony Weiner’s kiddie porn room.
This is ham-handed stuff, to be sure, but nobody ever thought to call Hillary “graceful” in any way.
“(Besides, who, other than little people, have the patience to wait for a document to print out on a laser printer with 128-256K of memory?)”
Great insight overall, RSG. Though on this one point, there’s a fair chance that it was a Daisy Wheel — more “professional” looking. Of course, back then there were secretaries who could type faster than one of those beasts would print.
We all need to understand that liberals only see one thread and that is how the Russians hacked the election and defeated Hillary.
This entire investigation was over Hillary and her impossible explanations of why she used a private server as Secretary of State and whether she caused national security leaks in the process.
The DemonizingRats were frantic to take that investigation off the tracks and get it focused elsewhere. So, they blew the DNC hacking by the Russians way out of proportion.
Fact: the world is rife with hackers. Fact: Russia hacks everything it finds mildly useful in the cyberwar arena. Fact: so do we. Fact: every government in the world is caught up in this game and trying to play defense against it.
The Russians got nuthin’ out of the DNC. So, in typical DemonizingRat tradition, they made the “seriousness of the charge” louder and full of doom than the actual outcome of the hack.
And remember this about meddling in our sacred elections: Obama directed and funded his Chicago team to openly go into Israel and work to defeat Netanyahu.
Name one chargeable crime that Flynn committed. Spell out what the “Russian connection” means in terms of high crimes or misdemeanors by the President in his sworn oath to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
How well I recall the beating Ken Starr took over the Monica Lewinsky stupidity. Now the DemonizingRats want another special prosecutor so they can tar and feather him.
Hillary’s campaign manager Robby Mook tweeted:
And there you have it: the investigation might get back on track and deal with Hillary’s e-mail scandal and national security.
Just what national security crisis did the United States suffer if the Russians really did hack Hillary’s flaccid campaign to be be coronated?
We don’t have a national election for President and never have had one. Each state votes for the Presidential Electors for their state and the Presidential Electors each vote a month later in their state capitols and the ballots are sent to Washington D.C. where they are opened and counted in the Congress. How did the Russians hack that?
The stupid leftists in my neck of the woods think the American people should stand up to Trump and impeach him. They have no clue how government works.
RSG and Stathar, Long Live the Daisy Wheel
https://www.amazon.com/Brother-GX-6750-Daisy-Electronic-Typewriter/dp/B00004WFSC
And — be still my heart — the IBM Correcting Selectric
https://www.amazon.com/IBM-CORRECTING-SELECTRIC-II-TYPEWRITER/dp/B00EB1K2ZW/
apple betty (#17) Ah, the IBM correcting Selectric II. The high point of office machinery in my mind! (Well, that and a really good coffee maker.)
I’m one of those in-betweens on computers. I can handle the basics to intermediate stuff, but constant changes seemingly just for the sake of change are very annoying.
At least the truth is clear, now: Hillary-supporting Democrats love Comey. They always did. Because they know, deep down, what a great service he performed by giving her a “sham” investigation and not indicting her.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/10/exclusive-james-comey-threw-the-reputation-of-the-fbi-under-the-bus-says-bureaus-former-assistant-director/
Love the shout out to the IBM Selectric with the correcting strip cartridge! A UUuuge upgrade from my manual Royal with the sticking keys and white out! And how can you not mention carbon paper? Typing research papers with footnotes (because endnotes didn’t come out til later) was fraught with peril! And then when I went to college, I had the great fortune of dating a guy who’s parents had one of the first Macintosh computers with word processing! I had so much spare time on my hands using that, I was able to type his papers and mine! We’ve come a long way, baby!
Hi ILoveCapitalism,
“First, according to Democrat/Left mythology, Comey is supposed to be pro-Trump and an enemy of Hillary – remember?”
Well, I am not interested in mythology in this case. I can be annoyed about his October surprise, but we can separate things, right? I think that was a mistake to do that action. Yesterday, he was doing a job investigating the Russian connections, if any, to the Trump Campaign, in his position as FBI Director. Separate issue aren’t they? He did not appear to be a captive of the Administration, but trying to chart his own course. I think that was the reason he got fired. The President needs a lap poodle, pronto.
“Second, the FBI Director doesn’t investigate. He’s way above it. Especially nowadays, the actual investigators would keep plenty of records on an important investigation, so firing the Director would be the exact wrong way to suppress it.”
I understand the claim, but then you would need to reconcile it with this report from today’s papers. It appears pretty clear that is exactly what Comey was doing–heading an investigation–as head of the FBI–into the Russian connections–and that he got fired for it. But, I take your point–leaking to commence to the media like a SIEVE.
I know that folks are making fun of libruls who hated Comey for his actions hurting HC’s candidacy, but they can still be worried that this guy gets fired for what appear political reasons. Those are not mutually inconsistent positions. By all means laugh at others… What continues to astound me, ILoveCapitalism, is that the default position of folks on this site is that there is nothing problematic about any of this stuff. Can you imagine what the editorial (and commentator) voice of this site would be like if this was happening during a Democratic Administration? Do I have to spell it out, or can we agree that the degree of equanimity to all of these bull shenanigans would be COMPLETELY missing?
“It’s more likely (though still unlikely – I am making a point about the unlikelihood of your suggestion, here) for Comey himself to be a Russian agent.”
As to your last claim, I have no idea. I am sure that this theory eventually will be advanced in some quarters … I look forward to the evidence.
It was Hillary herself who said Comey was one factor in her loss…yet her supporters now scream against his firing? You can’t have it both ways.
No, he was doing a counter-intelligence investigation into whatever Russia did or didn’t. Comey has informed Trump that he is not under criminal investigation, and earlier this week, Obama DNI Clapper told Congress that there is “no evidence” of any Trump-Russia collusion.
Moreover, the NYT article you linked is written by Democrats, for Democrats; other sources contradict its claims.
Answered here: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2017/05/10/the-man-can-tweet/
Cas @ #22:
Case closed. Cas has a made up mind and facts don’t matter.
Let’s hear a thought or two about this from Rush:
Good Lord, didn’t the DemonizingRats start screaming WATERGATE!!!! and ARCHIBALD COX!!! in a nano-second?
According to Comey, Clapper, Yates and many others there is not one shred of evidence that the Russians corrupted the election in any manner whatsoever. Nor has there been one shred of evidence that Trump is connected to the Russians in any nefarious way whatsoever. Not even evidence of a “suggestion.”
So, the loons on the left want this thing to go on and on and on because of the “seriousness of the charge.”
If you could lock lunatics up on the same basis, there would be no DemonizingRats on the loose.
Hi ILoveCapitalism,
” he was doing a counter-intelligence investigation into whatever Russia did or didn’t. Comey has informed Trump that he is not under criminal investigation,”
OK, I just want to clarify that a “counter-intelligence investigation” is in fact an investigation, right?
Also, as far as I know from what I have read, you are right that the President is not under investigation, BUT the Trump campaign (and its officials like Flynn I expect) is under investigation–if there is a connection with Russia–“connection” requires that there are folks on both ends of the connection, right? Do we have agreement on that? If there is more, no one is saying so–at least at the moment. I think that possibility that there is more to all this that is keeping Republicans awake at night.
Does your skepticism of the Press extend beyond the NY Times? This IS the main story being reported by the mainstream media, or are you arguing that the mainstream media itself cannot be trusted. If that last is the case, then what investigative sources are you reading (and do they have the resources of the mainstream media to ferret out the story)? If the Senate decides to ask Comey to testify to the issues, we would find out in a hurry. How likely is that though?
Not if you’ll be using the term to elide an important distinction (that is, to commit a fallacy of equivocation). Apples and oranges are both fruits, yet we have a proverb about how they can’t be compared.
Criminal and counter-intelligence investigations have different rules and implications. And, no law says that an FBI Director can’t or shouldn’t be fired if any interesting investigation (of either kind) happens to be ongoing.
Oh, yes. I call it the Controlled Media; some on the Left call it the Corporate Media. The large media organs which are controlled by a combination of the CIA or Deep State, and certain billionaires. Carlos Slim (and CIA) control NYT, Jeff Bezos (and CIA) control The Washington Post, Rothschild family (and CIA) control The Economist, and so forth. I did a post on CNN as fake/Controlled media, I think in early to mid April.
I catch a fair amount Controlled Media at the gym and while surfing online. I supplement with a lot of alt-media: Zero Hedge, Breitbart, HotAir, maybe Rebel Media or Cernovich Media, and sometimes taking a direct look at Wikileaks or some document. The stuff that I tend to link in my posts here.
The important thing is to read critically and use one media organ to plug the omissions of another.
No, but the question doesn’t mean much. I mean, that’s the whole point of Pajamas Media (the name). The Controlled Media lie to us, sometimes by inventing Fake News outright, but more often by omission: by what they refrain from telling us. They frequently leave out stories (or large parts of stories) that don’t fit their preferred agenda – which is, aggressive globalism plus social and economic leftism (or Big Government); the Welfare-Warfare State.
In other words, it doesn’t matter if traditional media have a ton of resources because they almost never use them for objective, investigative reporting on the powerful. They use their resources to 1) promote themselves and 2) promote an aggressive globalist-socialist narrative, and 3) to marginalize / stigmatize any people who would challenge those things. That leaves a lot of gaps in the information, which the citizen-journalists must fill.
Of course you can’t believe everything that citizen-journalists tell you either, which is where you need critical thinking and self-assembly of the information.
Jim Rutenberg the New York Times media columnist, wrote a widely discussed column in August 2016 that clearly encouraged the idea that because a Trump presidency was “potentially dangerous” it was natural, defensible, and even necessary for a journalist to “move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional.” “If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies,” then “you have to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century.”
William Voegeli writes in the Claremont Review (March 1, 2017):
Voegeli further states that:
This whole liberal agenda journalism dates back the late 1960’s when Lyndon Johnson’s corruption of principles threw the gates wide open to leftist radicals.
In 2017, the American mainstream class of journalists is 90% (Gallup) progressive and write their ideological bias into their “reports.” Meanwhile, since 2005, fewer than 50% (Gallup) of Americans “trust” what the media reports. [In 2016, distrust of the media rose to 85%.]
Critical thinking is based on skepticism. When the journalist can not show what, say, General Flynn did that is illegal, why should the reader accept that General Flynn is corrupt? General Flynn spoke to the Russians concerning sanctions. That is not against the law. Perhaps it raises suspicions, but feeding or quelling suspicions is not strictly reporting. Any President, including Trump, has the right to decide when baggage needs to be jettisoned. That includes Comey.
The liberals need to step forward and drop the suspicion-driven accusations in favor of fact backed specifics.
Hi ILoveCapitalism,
Could we agree that an intelligence investigation could become a criminal investigation if evidence is found to support it? If so, what is the real distinction you are making when you assert that these two forms of investigation are “apples and oranges”? Might it be more like an appetizer and an entree?
“In other words, it doesn’t matter if traditional media have a ton of resources because they almost never use them for objective, investigative reporting on the powerful. They use their resources to 1) promote themselves and 2) promote an aggressive globalist-socialist narrative, and 3) to marginalize / stigmatize any people who would challenge those things. That leaves a lot of gaps in the information, which the citizen-journalists must fill. Of course you can’t believe everything that citizen-journalists tell you either, which is where you need critical thinking and self-assembly of the information.”
I am not as willing as you to dismiss the MSM, even though it has got decided problems and I grant the need for citizen journalists. But your answer allows for the possibility that “citizen journalists” might have their own biases. And what we have are people who are less able to do deeper investigatory journalism and are more positioned to do opinion pieces because they lack resources. When I read Zero Hedge, I don’t get the sense of it as being an investigatory journalism site. It tends to rely on regular “Controlled Media” as you would say, for its news and then put their own conservative sympathetic gloss on it I suspect that Breitbart might be more likely an example of what you hope will be “objective, investigative reporting on the powerful” because they might get more access to the WhiteHouse because of connections, and as such might be useful for disseminating the WH point of view, or getting access to news worthy scoops. I wonder if Breitbart will be interested in investigating powerful folks like President Trump or other powerful conservative figures who are allies of DT? I somehow doubt that they will–I would love to be pleasantly surprised.
Hi ILoveCapitalism’s interragator,
Brett Bodner, New York Daily News, May 11 2017, 1:07 AM:
How nice. What we have are people who are able to do deeper investigatory journalism and do not lack resources “reporting” what some anonymous (unsourced) gossip is ranting.
Granted New York Daily News is a liberal rag and even liberals know it is fake news. (I read that according to a report.)
An anonymous person close to the White House told the Washington Post. – Was this anonymous source, close to the White House standing across the street? Or, did this anonymous source know someone who mows the grass at the White House? Or, is this anonymous source a fellow reporter who exchanged gossip in the White House pool room with a WaPo reporter? Or is it Ivanka Trump?
There is no news here, whatsoever. But, by God, where there is suspicion, there is possibility and where there is possibility there is possible probability and where there is possible probability you can see causation just around the bend. Well, you can’t actually see causation, but you sure can smell it. Right?
A remora, also called a suckerfish, attaches itself to a bigger creature and eats the feces of the host. Cas is a remora who attaches to a commenter and then plays an endless game of “what if” and practices a coiling, weaselly, ambiguity and goal shifting.
Some people have no loyalties, no values, no doctrines, no beliefs, no affiliations, and no convictions. Their only constraint is their addiction to human attention, positive or negative. They are in full control of their faculties, cognisant of their choices, and goal-orientated. Their behaviour is intentional and directional. They are manipulators and their delusions are in the service of their stratagems. They have a chameleon-like ability to change guises, their conduct, and their convictions on a dime. They try to convert their social milieu to their point of view. If they fail, they modify their profile on the fly. They “play it by ear”. Their “Current Self” is extemporaneous – a perpetual work of art, permanently reconstructed in a reiterative process designed around intricate and complex feedback loops. They do not seek seek truth, they seek affirmation and getting you to feed their egos is their goal.
On the other hand, wrestling with a snake is not without its advantages. Even a three year old who keeps asking “why” can sharpen your wits and cause you to ponder.