HILLARY SHOULD HAVE BEEN INDICTED.
You can find out a lot about where someone is coming from, if you ask that as a yes/no question. “Can we agree that Hillary should have been indicted?”
For people who can admit it, a mindset follows naturally:
- It’s OK that she lost the election. (Indeed, she shouldn’t have been running.)
- Which means there’s no unusual or particular reason to suspect President Trump.
- Of course we should look at Trump objectively, and nail him for any wrongdoing. But let’s not drag it out forever. Because he may be fine; see points 1 and 2.
- Comey did a bad job in 2016. He grandstanded for the cameras and usurped authority that wasn’t his, in a way that ended with Hillary not being indicted. He should have been fired sooner.
- It’s deeply wrong and disturbing that the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump.
For people who can’t admit it:
- OMG, the election was STOLEN from her!!!1!!1!!
- Which means Trump must be something horrible, like a Nazi Russian spy!! who secretly loves Vladimir Putin!!
- If we haven’t caught Trump doing anything wrong, it’s because we haven’t looked enough! Keep looking! As long as it takes to come up with it!
- Comey must have been fired because he was getting too close to it! Crisis!!!!1!
- Thank Gaia the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump!
All those toxic contortions, because the person can’t admit the key truth – that Hillary should have been indicted.
Two weeks ago, I had to take my annual refresher training on handling classified information, since I do that as part of my day job.
The training (which is Government-mandated, but handled by a company the Government subcontracts to) took much longer this year as it has in past years. Why? Because the course now super-emphasizes how it is ILLEGAL to distribute classified information outside classified networks and ILLEGAL to remove or change classified markings from documents.
If what Hillary did was no big deal, why has the training been changed to emphasize that a peon like me get lectured that if I do what she did, I could get fired, fined, and/or imprisoned?
One day, either a good attorney will have charges dropped, due to the Hillary defense, or she will be charged for her mishandling of classified material.
Hillary lost because of a variety of reasons. She has always been a polarising figure. And, while she has come a long way (consider she went from being a villified First Lady to 65 million votes for U.S. president being no small feat), some people were never going to like her (and disliked her a little bit more, because, yes, who she was as a person, but, yes, also, for some, innate bias had them liking her a little less because she was a woman). As well, while she has loosened up a bit over there years, she still had a sometimes robotic, stilted personality that played too much into being a politician and not enough into being relateable. Her campaign was good at times, but far from being the slam-dunk it needed to be to run away with the election. Benghazi, the emails, the Clinton Foundation, etc, all played a role too (the trust issues, as well as criminal implications). That Comey announcement didn’t help either. And, there was a great deal of “inevitability” that the polling showed she was going to win and the media kept that narrative going (which worked to her disfavour: “She’s going to win, why bother to vote,” etc). Most glaringly, though, (just so we’re clear) her lack of an effective Midwest strategy, as well as reaching a huge chunk of disenfranchised white voters and communicating a more clear economic message hindered her ability to get elected. And what it all ended up being was a recipe for losing some 90,000 votes or so from three states, showing how a few adjustments here and there could have tipped the scales in her favour. While the electoral loss was seemingly wide, the margins were actually scarily thin, considering how many millions of voters don’t make up their minds until Election Day.
However, if I have written on GP since the election that it was stolen, please feel free to remind me. As I remember it, one of my first comments was something to the effect of, “I don’t like the result, but I’ll give this a chance and see where it goes.” Unfortunately, it all went downhill quickly (for me). I didn’t care for most of the cabinet appointments, although I did like a couple (and I commented as such on GP).
But, on GP with some commenters, I’m finding that being wrong about something is actually being right (in more ways than one), because someone simply believes it. And that’s that!
More than anything, I believe the current administration is monstrously inept and idiotic (and has implications of its own), as I clearly commented recently in another thread. Such as, saying you have met with an FBI director, spoken to them about a specific case where you are part of the target of investigation (three times), and asking that “we’re cool, right?” Like, what? lmao In what world is this smart or ethical? Bizarre.
@ #3 Cray Cray: You think that GP commenters believe that they are right simply because they opine and pontificate? Have you ever listened to or read some of the things these self-righteous virtue seeking people are saying? They are no better, if not worse than those of whom you described in your response above
Cray Cray. If your opinion of TRUMP is informed by the Democratic Media Complex of course you would be disappointed. You have too scan with a electron microscope to find good news about anything. Meanwhile up the road in Grammercy ,Nucore is hiring. Nucore makes iron, which is used to make steel.In the oil industry we can’t find steel, machine shop space or workers willing to do it again. But you would never know any of that if your news comes from anyone. with a journalism degree.
Operative word in my last post: “some”
Based on my recent exchange with TnnsNE1/damaged justice in another thread, and other convos in the past, I believe that some GP commenters think they’re right simply because they believe they are.
I don’t suffer from that delusion. So, when I interact with people, I have certain expectations that they don’t.
My opinion of him is informed by his own words and actions. Thanks.
Back to the topic.Yes Hillary, Bil and anyone else should face consequences for her crimes. But I would settle for them turning states evidence, for I feel the corruption goes much deeper.
!
Can anyone tell me the last time China stepped on the little midget in North Korea? CrayCray? Do you know? Anyone?
Anyone care to tell me why China…CHINA…has agreed to let us sell our beef in their country? Do you know CrayCray? How about you Rusty?
Poor misunderstood CCP. Sounds just like HCR.
At least we have 8 years of history proving just how inept BO was at being POTUS. You would think people could give Trump at least a year.
CCP is a typical liberal, put sand in the gas tank then complain to GM that their car doesn’t run correctly.
I will stop calling you a moron with a broken moral compass.
Although, anyone who supports HRC is ……
Well, this administration has certainly provided the necessary fertiliser to get the job done.
I hope you like Chinese chicken, Lobogris. Bon appetit.
As far as the N. Korean dictator, I can’t remember the last time I heard someone use the term “midget.” Can’t say I’m surprised hearing it here and now. Oh silly me for having any reaction.
@3 “for some, innate bias had them liking her a little less because she was a woman” bull! there was a whole lot more people that supported her solely because she was a woman. she benefited from sexual bias a hell of a lot more than she was hurt by it.
This is very true. I was cataloguing the reasons why people didn’t vote for her. But, yeah, those who did because she was a woman nullified those who didn’t because she was.
Cray, I would disagree with you that a Democrat getting 65 million votes is no small feat.
Yes, it *is* a small feat. She was the Democrat nominee and no matter how corrupt, there are plenty of people who would voted for the Democrat if it had been Robespierre, Rasputin, or Caligula.
Remember HOW she became the nominee: by working back deals to ensure that she would be no matter HOW the primaries turned out. In other words, the Democratic Primaries were a sham to get the rank and file to THINK they were picking the nominee, when in fact they were not.
She hid herself from the press because she knew she could not handle close scrutiny. Everything had to be scripted. Even her poorly attended rallies, for which there is plenty of evidence, were made to look bigger than they actually were.
She hid her health issues as well.
She was not forthcoming about anything, was in on the disruption of Trump’s rallies by paid violent protesters, cheated in the debates, got upset when anyone asked her questions she was not prepared to answer, flew into blind rages when things did not go her way.
It was a small feat, lastly, because it was meaningless. We do not elect presidents by popular vote. We never have, and it is a good thing that we don’t, lest the country would be run by people who not only would know nothing of rural America, would treat rural America with disdain, a la The Hunger Games.
“think they’re right simply because they believe they are”
CCP engages in IMAX-level projection in oder to maintain his precarious Jenga tower of double standards, hypocrisy, rationalization and denial.
CracyCray @ #3:
The very next thing in his comment:
CrayCray skips over ILC’s:….
……and goes straight for ILC’s first dodge….
Did Pavlov’s dog have a name?
SMH. CrayCray, I realize that with all the noise coming from the propaganda arm of the Democratic/Socialist Party it may be hard to actually pay attention to things that actually matter. Try harder.
One really glaring internal contradiction in the ‘Trump is Hitler!’ and ‘Trump colluded with Russia!’ is that the Russians HATE Nazis. Twenty million dead Russians left an imprint on the Russian psyche, and there is NO WAY any Russian government would cooperate with any Nazi.
David – Yeah, it’s funny. If you know history, no one can be both a Nazi and a Russian agent.
CCP:
Agreed. The thing is, all of the reasons you gave center around the fact she’s untrustworthy. She’s “disliked” and “polarizing” because she has had scandal after scandal through the decades – and lied about them all. She didn’t campaign in Michigan because her advisors decided that she would actually worsen her own chances there, if she did (_Shattered_, p. 368). She had so many power-hungry, conflicting advisors because she was such an intensely calculated or “manufactured” type of candidate…why? because much of the public hated her…why? because of the decades of scandal. You can list out the 19 reasons but they all trace back to one thing: Hillary, the power-seeker who behaves characteristically as if rules are for other people (not her).
I am forced to ask: Can we agree that Hillary should have been indicted? (in 2016, over the gross negligence in handling classified info PLUS her subsequent obstructions of justice)
I didn’t have you in mind. I was thinking of some of the Hillary-supporter commentary just after the election to the effect “It should have been hers”.
I doubt the reporting on that one. Comey is, at this point, a disgruntled former employee. And we all know what they can be like. Some of them will say anything. Others will pick up on something true-ish but give it a bizarre spin. I’m waiting to get the other side of the story (i.e. both sides of it) before I decide.
Moving on…
Indeed. I don’t see Comey’s firing as particularly inept. President Trump did something that almost everyone (except Krauthammer) thought a great idea, as late as the morning of May 9. And his and Rosenstein’s explanations have been sufficient. Everything that has turned out to be bad in the Comey firing has arisen out of the hypocrisy and malice of Trump’s opponents; not the act as such.
Indeed, Craig – I read something yesterday to the effect that Bernie donors are suing the DNC for not following its own rules during the primaries, and the DNC’s defense is roughly “We can do what we want – we have no contractual obligation to our donors or anybody, to honor our official rules.” (Wish I had saved the link.) Ditto your other comments.
Lefties are like many charismatic Christians. They go looking for demons behind every lamppost, laying the blame for their misfortune/bad decisions/irresponsibility on the demon. Nobody in his right mind would say that the USA is at its zenith these days, but the problems we face aren’t the result of the 2016 Presidential election. It’s easier to blame the invisible bogey man than it is to face reality, exercise self-discipline, and make difficult choices that are beneficial in the long-term rather than indulging in instant gratification.
For those who have had extensive contact with charismatics, many are of the mindset that they’ve heard the voice of the Lord, and nothing can dissuade them from their path. Jonathan Edwards, the Puritan preacher, said it was next to impossible to reason with a man who presumes to speak for God. Try to tell a charismatic something he claims God “spoke” to him is wrong. Likewise, try to tell a lefty that their worldview is skewed. You can’t. They don’t understand economics (or even simple math) or human nature, so you can’t tell them anything.
It’s a religion.
I still struggle with this.
Here’s an interesting article that I am sure CrayCray will just love 😉 xoxoxo
http://johnbeuhler.blogspot.ca/2017/05/how-oprah-paved-way-for-trump.html?m=1
“I can’t remember the last time I heard someone use the term “midget.””
Didn’t you see the picture of JEBS! wife?
CrayCray you will have more fun if you invite the Russians under your bed to over your bed.
KCRob I put in the last post about NZ, Chile Argentina and Uruguay for retirement.
@craycraypatriot, you have, on numerous occasions, said that the election was hacked by russians, and thus ‘stolen’ either by or for Trump. That the election was in fact illegitimate.
I will however grant you that you stopped saying that after the last time you tangled with me over it.
The Russians did interfere with the election. It hasn’t been proven that Trump colluded with them. I’ll trust you that I argued he did. I do get hotheaded at times, and I’ve been trying to reign that in and be more sensible.
I don’t remember this (lol), but I trust you that it happened. Thanks for being fair about it.
That “lol” was a self-deprecating one aimed directly at me, just so we’re clear!
You know what bothers me about this talk of hacking? When I think of something being hacked I think about the hacker getting in and changing something. There is no evidence that any votes were changed or that any actual voting was changed. All that occurred was that a few days before the election some emails came out that proved that Hillary Clinton had done some illegal email sharing on servers other than those that were secure. Why shouldn’t that be revealed? Not too long before the election a video was revealed of Trump that proved how disgusting he is . How is revealing Hillary did something illegal any different ? For me I think the issue is the word hack is being used incorrectly; leaking information is the better choice…there is no evidence that anything was actually changed on either side simply that something was leaked that was derogatory and influential against Hillary’s candidacy…am I wrong?
The Gay Patriot website is one of the absolute best websites that provides a dose of sanity in an insane world. I visit the site every day and appreciate your rationally dosed editorials.
“It’s deeply wrong and disturbing that the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump.”
The Obama admin wasn’t “spying” that’s a typical rightist lie. Trumps campaign advisers and campaign managers were calling known Russian spies. So the FBI got a warrant and found that indeed trump team was colluding with the Russians.
The first thing Trump did as president was lift sanctions on the Russian intelligence agency that helped run a smear campaign against Clinton – coordinated by Trumps campaign advisers.
http://tass.com/world/928735
But yeah those emails……
Haha.. lil letter mike is carrying lots and lots of water for the Demoncrats. Poor lil loser mike.
“Here for your weekly haircut, Mr. Conservative?”
“Like usual, Mr. Liberal. Anything new?”
“Well, the former chairman of the Democrat’s presidential campaign got his email hacked.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because it gave us something to complain about.”
“Oh, that’s good.”
“No, that’s bad, because it also revealed that the Democrats had been into some pretty shady behavior.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because the head of the FBI said the behavior was okay, since there was no criminal intent.”
“Oh, that’s good!”
No, that’s bad, because he found more and re-opened the investigation.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because he closed it only a few days later.”
“Oh, that’s good!”
“No, that’s bad, because the Democrats lost the election.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because it gave us a chance to blame both Russia and the head of the FBI!”
“Oh, that’s good!”
“No, that’s bad. Because we had no solid evidence that is was Russia.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because it gave us an excuse to call for an investigation.”
“Oh, that’s good!”
“No, that’s bad, because the FBI wouldn’t help us with that.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because we could then call for his resignation or firing.”
“Oh, that’s good!”
“No, that’s bad, because he actually got fired.”
“Oh, that’s bad.”
“No, that’s good! Because now we can claim that he was fired for the wrong reason!”
Hey, littlelettermikey, the fascist:
Well, now, colluding with the Russians is an indictable offense. “Indeed” makes the “colluding” charge an open and shut case.
So, it would appear that the Trump Department of Justice is not doing its job. Why haven’t you smart DemonizingRats gone trolling in the 9th Circus for a moon bat leftist judge to order Trump and company to trial?
Or, on the other hand, is your statement that “indeed (the) trump (sic) team was colluding with the Russians” just a bunch of littlelettermikey, the fascist hot air?
To quote the original post:
“All those toxic contortions, because the person can’t admit the key truth ”
Yet here we find conservatives like heliotrope twisting themselves (and logic) in knots because conservatives keep denying 3 simple truths:
1 conservatives were so caught up in Hillary Hate that they are willing to believe obviously false Russian propaganda (pizzagate for one example)
2 two Trump campaign officials are disgraced due to their Russian ties(and more to come i am sure)
3 one of Trumps first official acts was to lift sanctions on a Russia spy agency -(quid pro quo anyone?)
Can you admit you were duped and now we have an unstable nut job as prez who has already done the bidding of Russian spy agencies?
Or are you conservatives going to find more “toxic contortions” and keep living in your state of denial?
This seems rather straight-forward to me. Yet, it gets spun as “Obama was illegally spying.”
Huh? I just don’t get it.
Ditto, amongst many dittos…
Cray,Cray:
There are three entirely separate memes out there:
1) Obama spied on the Repugnants.
2) Trump colluded with the Russians.
3) The Russians hacked the DNC.
These three may or may not have a nexus.
If there is to be a “special prosecutor” I would think that there would need to be three special prosecutors: one for each separate meme.
The Obama group could have used the “deep state” to spy on Repugnants.
The Trump people could have illegally colluded with Ruskies.
The Ruskies could have hacked the DNC.
At some point, two all three memes may intersect, but that is not necessary.
Only littlelettermikey, the fascist, is responsible for hooking the Obama spying meme with the Trump-Russia collusion charge, by lumping them in the same paragraph.
littlelettermikey, the fascist declares that categorically, there was no Obama spying on Repugnants. littlelettermikey, the fascist also declares that categorically, there was a Trump-Russia collusion.
What is to be confused over?
Until the “unmasking” problem is uncovered and until the FISA warrant particulars are known (if there actually was a FISA warrant) and until it has been ascertained that the Russian fingerprints left in the DNC hacking are legit and not planted, we the people are just speculating.
littlelettermikey, the fascist, as usual, speaks in facts when the facts are pure speculation. That is to say, littlelettermikey, the fascist, is spreading Fake News and using it for ground upon which he stands.
“The Obama group could have used the “deep state” to spy on Repugnants.
The Trump people could have illegally colluded with Ruskies.”
Here are some truths. as confirmed publicly by the FBI:
Truth #1: There is zero evidence that Obama did “spy” on conservatives. – The only person who says its true is Conservatives who say Global Warming is a Chinese Plot & Obama was born in Kenya – (only a raving lunatic would say such a thing)
Truth #2 There is evidence that the Russians interfered with the election, and there is evidence of links between the Trump campaign & Russia.
Truth #3: Two of Trump’s campaign officials are disgraced due to their Russian ties.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/us/politics/intelligence-committee-russia-donald-trump.html?_r=0
That is not spin- except for the part in parenthesis.
That is not “fake news”
That is not bias.
Its cold hard truth.
Yet you are using “toxic contortions” because conservatives are afraid to confront the truth- they got duped by Russian propaganda.
Hey mike, Elvis didn’t do no drugs.
Poor, Pavlov’s dog littlelettermikey, the fascist, goes to Comy and DemonizingRat mouth piece, The New York Times and lays this on us:
Point #1, everyone knows there is an investigation of Russian “interference” and a search to see if Trump is somehow connected.
Point #2, you have to be blind and braindead not to notice that now the NYT is going stark literal: Obama (personally) wiretapped Trump Tower. In #1, the NYT carefully chose to use words like “interference in the presidential election” and “associates of the president” and “in contact with Moscow.”
In this NYT carefully structured hit piece, we “learn” that Russia “interferes” in elections everywhere as a matter of practice. Then we learn that “associates of Trump” were “in contact” with Moscow.
The FBI could investigate Pavlov’s dog littlelettermikey, the fascist to see if his tinfoil hat interferes with electric toothbrushes. But what C-R-I-M-E would they be looking for?
We know for an almost certainty that President Obama did not don his Spiderman suit and scale Trump Tower and wiretap it. Therefore, we must also know for a fact that Obama did not take any actions calculated to aid and abet the DemonizingRats in prying into classified documents in search of stuff that would wound the Trump campaign for President. After all, that would be a Crime, unless it involved something akin to Hillary’s private server.
Pavlov’s dog littlelettermikey, the fascist can’t read. Or, at least, won’t read. When Bill Clintoon said “I did not have sex with that woman….” He was telling the stark truth. His own private definition of “sex” was not compromised in any way. That’s how lying liars don’t lie. When Obambi said: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor!” he was telling the Gospel Truth. You buy Obambicare, but you are free to pay your own doctor and your bills outside of Obambicare.
The NYT reads a fishing investigation by the FBI as proof that a crime has been committed.
Well, Pavlov’s dog littlelettermikey, the fascist Where’s the charges? Flynn, you might note, has yet to be charged with a single C-R-I-M-E. Oh, they compromised him pretty good. But James B. Comey sent Scotter Libby and Martha Stewart to P-R-I-S-O-N and couldn’t find anything to charge Hillary with and now can’t manufacture something, anything to N-A-I-L Flynn with. Dear me.
It would be interesting to be able to see how a looney leftist’s mind is wired. When the NYT signals, the leftist conditioned dog salivates and runs right here with fake truth.
Put your vagina cap on and try to understand this: I am open to the possibility, based on solid evidence, that Flynn is guilty of overstepping the law in some manner. Ditto Hillary. Ditto Obama. Ditto Trump. Ditto The Pope. Ditto Rachel MadCow. Ditto Quantum Physicist Maxine Waters. Ditto Chelsea. You, on the other hand work from “He’s Guilty” and don’t even try to work back to examining the evidence. Real fascist of you, but not surprising.
I don’t get it.
When a FISA warrant is issued, it allows them to monitor foreign influence without revealing who it is they are talking to. The reason is simple: the warrant is for the foreign power, not the American citizen.
If actual collusion can be found, then, and only then, can they request an unmasking (like a new warrant).
Despite the lack of any evidence (No, just talking to a Russian ambassador is not evidence of collusion. The subject of the talk is important.) several people were unmasked, Flinn among them.
Flinn was not fired for talking to a Russian ambassador, he was fired for lying about it.
So, to conclude, we don’t have any substantial evidence that Russia colluded with anyone to influence the election.
But we DO have evidence that several people in the Trump campaign were illegally unmasked. Why? That’s the big question.
Barron Trump’s new school has been announced.
How long will it take for the vile left to start protesting the school?
Speaking as myself:
1. There is no need for me to dislike Hillary for being female. If her 30+ years of public corruption wasn’t enough, her gender wasn’t going to put me over the top.
2. I don’t care about Russian collusion. Not even little bit. If it were true and we knew all about it ahead of the election, I still would have cheerfully voted for Trump. (see point #1). But if find the entire story just mindlessly stupid. I’m pretty sure if the Russians really wanted to influence our elections, they would do a much better job. For example: A full page ad in the NY Times showing pictures of Drunk Hillary and drunk Albright in Yugoslavia, or releasing tapes of her hitting up foreign countries for “donations”.
3. There was no need for me to be influenced by Comey’s announcements before the election. (see point #1).
4. I voted for Trump because… See point #1.
5. The primary issue for this election was immigration. Trump won because he knew that and worked it. Hillary could have won the election if she had taken that issue as her own. Even Sanders could have won if he dominated that issue. Bush, Rubio and the rest of the Republicans lost the primary because they were on the wrong wide of this.
6. The secondary issue for this election was bloated, corrupt, out of control government. Hillary was the poster child for that. She was never going to win this issue. She couldn’t even run on “change”, which is normally pretty popular.