PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 24, 2016, 08:38:03 AM
-
But it did not. Why? Media covering, diverting, attacking Trump, controlling. HRC will be elected and it will be because Democrat voters trust their media, oh yes they do.
Sickening.
http://right-mind.us/wikileaks-founder-promises-that-hillarys-campaign-will-end-in-october-with-one-major-news/
Remember how the media and Dems adored Assange when he was releasing leaks about Bush?
-
If the Republican party had nominated a candidate instead of a caricature it would have taken her down. Sadly we don't live in that alternate universe.
Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!
-
If the Republican party had nominated a candidate instead of a caricature it would have taken her down. Sadly we don't live in that alternate universe.
You can't believe that. The media control the narrative.
-
You can't believe that. The media control the narrative.
When you hand them as much material to use as Trump has, of course they'll ignore Clinton. Any other candidate would let the news cycle run out of material about them and the media will need to fill airtime with Clinton. But every time something comes out about Clinton, Trump goes out and grabs the news cycle by saying something stupid.
-
When you hand them as much material to use as Trump has, of course they'll ignore Clinton. Any other candidate would let the news cycle run out of material about them and the media will need to fill airtime with Clinton. But every time something comes out about Clinton, Trump goes out and grabs the news cycle by saying something stupid.
it's almost like he wants to lose.
nah, I'm sure he wants to win.
-
Trump is a plant. He's there to ensure a Clinton victory. He played on stereotypical right wing fear and locked the GOP nomination. His antics scored hundreds of hours of free air time, ensuring other better qualified candidates be silenced from his bluster. The funny part is that because of all these antics, any opposing candidate should be winning in a landslide. That goes to show how subpar a candidate Clinton is.
As more WikiLeaks come out against HRC, watch what Trump does. I bet he will find a way to turn the attention onto him.
That being said, I was against WikiLeaks back in the Bush days, and I'm against it now. This organization is attempting subversion of our democracy. They are utilizing criminally obtained information and posting it publicly. If anyone has an agenda, it is most definitely them. I am now wondering if this may be part of a "vengeance" action for how the whole Snowden thing went down.
I think Marco Rubio has it right.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
When you hand them as much material to use as Trump has, of course they'll ignore Clinton. Any other candidate would let the news cycle run out of material about them and the media will need to fill airtime with Clinton. But every time something comes out about Clinton, Trump goes out and grabs the news cycle by saying something stupid.
You're right. The press ran out of shit to say about Romney, after they got done with the George Stephanopoulos-created "Romney's War on Women", his binder of women, his treatment of some kid in high school, and of course his cruelty to animals after putting the dog in a rack on the roof.
The fact is that ANY GOP candidate will draw fire from ANY DEM candidate given the accomplice media.
-
Trump is a plant. He's there to ensure a Clinton victory. He played on stereotypical right wing fear and locked the GOP nomination. His antics scored hundreds of hours of free air time, ensuring other better qualified candidates be silenced from his bluster. The funny part is that because of all these antics, any opposing candidate should be winning in a landslide. That goes to show how subpar a candidate Clinton is.
As more WikiLeaks come out against HRC, watch what Trump does. I bet he will find a way to turn the attention onto him.
That being said, I was against WikiLeaks back in the Bush days, and I'm against it now. This organization is attempting subversion of our democracy. They are utilizing criminally obtained information and posting it publicly. If anyone has an agenda, it is most definitely them. I am now wondering if this may be part of a "vengeance" action for how the whole Snowden thing went down.
I think Marco Rubio has it right.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Yep. None of it is on Hillary for taking all necessary steps to avoid the FOIA. It's all the messenger. And the Russians. And... And... And...
-
We are living in bizzaro world and some of the comments here are proof. ???
-
Yep. None of it is on Hillary for taking all necessary steps to avoid the FOIA. It's all the messenger. And the Russians. And... And... And...
Are you trying to say that the WikiLeak dumps we have seen the last few weeks are merely the result of a FOIA request? Which FOIA request would that be?
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
Are you trying to say that the WikiLeak dumps we have seen the last few weeks are merely the result of a FOIA request? Which FOIA request would that be?
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
No, and don't ask such stupid questions.
The WikiLeak revelations have exposed emails that would have surfaced in FOIA requests, Congressional subpoenas, and other discovery requests had she not taken the affirmative steps to conceal such documents from the light of day, through her private server and otherwise.
Or are you buying her answer when questioned whether she wiped her server, she said "You mean with a cloth?"
-
No, and don't ask such stupid questions.
The WikiLeak revelations have exposed emails that would have surfaced in FOIA requests, Congressional subpoenas, and other discovery requests had she not taken the affirmative steps to conceal such documents from the light of day, through her private server and otherwise.
Or are you buying her answer when questioned whether she wiped her server, she said "You mean with a cloth?"
I don't care about her answer. She's a career politician so the answer will be some canned response with a minutiae of truth and a plethora of bullshit.
I care about how WikiLeaks is obtaining this information.
Getting Podesta's and DNC's personal emails doesn't strike me as worthy of a FOIA request.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
I don't care about her answer. She's a career politician so the answer will be some canned response with a minutiae of truth and a plethora of bullshit.
I care about how WikiLeaks is obtaining this information.
Getting Podesta's and DNC's personal emails doesn't strike me as worthy of a FOIA request.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
You work in ATC, correct?
-
I don't care about her answer. She's a career politician so the answer will be some canned response with a minutiae of truth and a plethora of bullshit.
I care about how WikiLeaks is obtaining this information.
Getting Podesta's and DNC's personal emails doesn't strike me as worthy of a FOIA request.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Mark, you're a smart guy. Are you telling me you don't see how the players such as Hillary, Podesta and DNC personnel would circumvent "official" channels by using personal email accounts?
-
You work in ATC, correct?
Oh look. The anonymous dude (dudette?) strikes again. It doesn't matter where he works. Argue the points, not the person.
-
Oh look. The anonymous dude (dudette?) strikes again. It doesn't matter where he works. Argue the points, not the person.
Oh Look, Adam looks stupid again. ::)
My reason to ask him was this: He takes training EVERY year (mandatory) that covers classified material, safe handling of documents, FOIA request, workplace data security, etc. This training is given to every government agency, routinely. It's required, must be documented.
Also, he underwent a back ground security check, which every government employee undergoes who handles classified information.
So, imagine this. Working in his government job he takes his own thumb drive, plugs it in to his government computer and downloads several files. These files are government property, period. What happens if he get's caught?
Let's say he diverts all of his government emails to his private computer? Or has his colleagues send him government emails to his private email? What happens if he gets caught?
Yep, get caught, bye bye security clearance and most likely bye bye job. And all of his training emphasizes this.
And I promise you, Clinton has had the exact same training. She shouldn't qualify for any type of security clearance, period. She is not even qualified to work in a government office or agency.
-
Oh look. The anonymous dude (dudette?) strikes again. It doesn't matter where he works. Argue the points, not the person.
Asking Lucifer not to argue ad hominem is like asking the sun not to shine. It's all he knows how to do.
-
Oh look. The anonymous dude (dudette?) strikes again. It doesn't matter where he works. Argue the points, not the person.
I suspect he was going to make a point vis a vis a government employee's communications.
-
Mark, you're a smart guy. Are you telling me you don't see how the players such as Hillary, Podesta and DNC personnel would circumvent "official" channels by using personal email accounts?
The DNC is not the government. They are a political party organization. I could give a rats ass how they conduct any of their affairs.
I suspect he was going to make a point vis a vis a government employee's communications.
Which would be apples and oranges. I can honestly say I have no idea what training the Secretary of State undergoes.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
The DNC is not the government.
If Trump does not take the garbage out on Nov 8, they will be the de facto government.
-
If Trump does not take the garbage out on Nov 8, they will be the de facto government.
They're still a political party. Not an official branch or agency of the US government.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
The DNC is not the government. They are a political party organization. I could give a rats ass how they conduct any of their affairs.
Except when one of the parties is using their own server and email to communicate with them to avoid FOIA. Sec Clinton's emails used in the State Dept are property of the government.
Which would be apples and oranges. I can honestly say I have no idea what training the Secretary of State undergoes.
Oh please! You damn well know the government's position on this and that they require this training through out the government.
-
They're still a political party. Not an official branch or agency of the US government.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
So is the Communist Party in China.
-
You can't believe that. The media control the narrative.
You shouldn't believe that.
And Trump is a master of manipulating the media. He bragged about all the free publicity he got while trouncing his primary opponents. The media chases clicks and eyeballs. They chase whatever will give them the content that will get the readers/viewers. Readers/views equals money. This is not complicated.
Trump has skeletons in his closest and the Dems were bound to suss them out and drop them at an advantageous time. That is how the game is played. The only surprising thing is that none of Trump's primary opponents didn't dig up any of those skeletons. I doubt that will happen again.
-
Except when one of the parties is using their own server and email to communicate with them to avoid FOIA.
You mean like the private server run by the RNC that many Bush staffers, like Colin Powell, used for private communications?
-
I guess Kristen does not pay attention to the MSM. They have become and arm of the DNC and will do whatever it takes to get Hillary elected. They don't even try to hide it anymore. Take a look at the first two debates, not only did Hillary take shots at Trump but the moderators got into the game also by arguing with him over some of his answers to their questions including trying to fact check him on the spot. What we had was the moderators bowing to the command from HRC to fact check Donald as she had been harping on it leading up to the debates.
-
You mean like the private server run by the RNC that many Bush staffers, like Colin Powell, used for private communications?
Did anyone FOIA the records from that server? If the records were FOIA'ed, did the RNC/Colin Powell delete said records? Did the RNC/ Colin Powell delete their records after receiving a subpoena for said records?
-
Yep. None of it is on Hillary for taking all necessary steps to avoid the FOIA. It's all the messenger. And the Russians. And... And... And...
Mark is a classic progressive robot. I have never seen a post from him that didn't simply repeat democrat talking points without substance or value.
-
Oh look. The anonymous dude (dudette?) strikes again. It doesn't matter where he works. Argue the points, not the person.
Right after you admit the massive democratic party vote fraud going on...
-
Oh Look, Adam looks stupid again. ::)
My reason to ask him was this:
I couldn't care less what your reason is. You hide behind your anonymity while regularly bringing in the personal lives of your debate opponents. I will continue to call you out for it.
PS - If we're going to be on a first-name basis, you should at least tell me yours. And buy me a beer.
-
I couldn't care less what your reason is. You hide behind your anonymity while regularly bringing in the personal lives of your debate opponents. I will continue to call you out for it.
PS - If we're going to be on a first-name basis, you should at least tell me yours. And buy me a beer.
Bullshit. MarkZ has posted about what he does on other forums.
You're constantly trying to deflect away from the topic when someone's opinion doesn't represent your own.
-
Bullshit. MarkZ has posted about what he does on other forums.
You're constantly trying to deflect away from the topic when someone's opinion doesn't represent your own.
Nah, it's just you. ;)
How 'bout that beer?
-
Mark is a classic progressive robot. I have never seen a post from him that didn't simply repeat democrat talking points without substance or value.
He's a federal union monkey. Knows where his bananas come from.
-
You mean like the private server run by the RNC that many Bush staffers, like Colin Powell, used for private communications?
No, not at all.
Kristin - if you had subpoenaed email records and your opponent not only deleted 30,000 emails but then also bleached washed the drive, what kind of penalty would you be asking for? How would you feel if the judge and your opponent were colluding to agree to overlook the crime.
The reason she has not been convicted of obstruction of justice is because the Republican Congress needs to make sure they get reelected. The media would lie and make this about partisianship, not about the rule of law. If she had not been running for president she would have had a special prosecuter appointed and she would be wearing an orange jumpsuit right now.
Hillary flaunted her privleged status to commit a major crime, one which would disqualify her from being president. Nobody but a non-thinking partisan hack could excuse what she did and they do it at the price of destroying the rule of law.
Nixon was going to be kicked out of office for deleting 17 minutes of tape. Hillary deleted 30,000 emails, some of which are being recovered by other means - and we know they were not about recipes and yoga.
Nobody with any kind of moral code could support this.
-
The DNC is not the government. They are a political party organization. I could give a rats ass how they conduct any of their affairs.
Which would be apples and oranges. I can honestly say I have no idea what training the Secretary of State undergoes.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Jesus Christ. Don't be stupid. If government officials are conducting business using non-government email systems, including the DNC's system, it should be subject to FOIA and subpoena. HOW the DNC conduct their business is irrelevant, UNLESS they are aiding and abetting FOIA avoidance.
-
Trump is a plant. He's there to ensure a Clinton victory. He played on stereotypical right wing fear and locked the GOP nomination. His antics scored hundreds of hours of free air time, ensuring other better qualified candidates be silenced from his bluster. The funny part is that because of all these antics, any opposing candidate should be winning in a landslide. That goes to show how subpar a candidate Clinton is.
As more WikiLeaks come out against HRC, watch what Trump does. I bet he will find a way to turn the attention onto him.
That being said, I was against WikiLeaks back in the Bush days, and I'm against it now. This organization is attempting subversion of our democracy. They are utilizing criminally obtained information and posting it publicly. If anyone has an agenda, it is most definitely them. I am now wondering if this may be part of a "vengeance" action for how the whole Snowden thing went down.
I think Marco Rubio has it right.
I would agree with Marco in a normal year. This is not a normal year. Everything seems to be up for consideration. That said, there is certainly validity for questioning why Assange doesn't want Hillary elected. The Russia connection is possible, because Putin has made his disgust for Obama and Hillary clear. Does he see Trump as a more worthy leader? Probably.
Trump is not a plant. He merely accessed the frustration and anger of many people, including, I hear, many Democrats.
He is trying to turn attention to the revelations (not new to anyone who looks deeper than mainstream) from Assange. But the mainstream has admitted they are ignoring Hillary's negatives in favor of blowing up Trump's, to the tune of 20:1.
Clinton is indeed subpar, as is Trump. What we need right now is a real leader, and of the two, Trump exhibits more of that quality. HRC is very unwell, so Kaine would undoubtedly step up soon. HRC is completely not able to withstand the rigors of travel and long hours of work the presidency requires.
-
Trump is not a plant. He merely accessed the frustration and anger of many people, including, I hear, many Democrats.
If he isn't a plant, he is doing a fine job of impersonating one.
-
If he isn't a plant, he is doing a fine job of impersonating one.
Potted plant or free range?
-
Potted plant or free range?
lol! I was thinking the same thing. Definitely not potted. I met him at Pottstown Muni.
-
lol! I was thinking the same thing. Definitely not potted. I met him at Pottstown Muni.
;D Sorry for your loss! ;D Hopefully you haven't taken back any hairstyling tips.
-
;D Sorry for your loss! ;D Hopefully you haven't taken back any hairstyling tips.
lol! Actually, I am pretty closely cropped, so no comb overs! He was actually very cordial as he was picking up his son Eric from the Hill School. I was degreasing the belly of the Tiger, so covered with grease, sweat, etc. He came with two stunning blondes, neither his wife. When the limo came to pick them up to take them to get Eric at the Hill School I hung out with his Sikorsky pilots. Both Vietnam combat vets with a bazillion hours in country, and otherwise. They had some stories to tell!
-
I guess Kristen does not pay attention to the MSM. They have become and arm of the DNC and will do whatever it takes to get Hillary elected. They don't even try to hide it anymore. Take a look at the first two debates, not only did Hillary take shots at Trump but the moderators got into the game also by arguing with him over some of his answers to their questions including trying to fact check him on the spot. What we had was the moderators bowing to the command from HRC to fact check Donald as she had been harping on it leading up to the debates.
Trump is a media magnet. It is what he does. He loves it most of the time, but not when it covers something he has done wrong. It is a bit idiotic for him to complain about the media when he was boasting about all the free publicity they gave him which he GOP rivals would have killed for. Trump sucks the oxygen out of the room and the media follow him around. These are companies chasing ratings and by extension the dollar. The narrative of biased media and rigged elections is to salve Trump's ego when he loses.
-
Trump is a real estate developer.
-
Did anyone FOIA the records from that server? If the records were FOIA'ed, did the RNC/Colin Powell delete said records? Did the RNC/ Colin Powell delete their records after receiving a subpoena for said records?
A private server run by the RNC is not subject to FOIA. That is the whole point of a private server.
-
No, not at all.
Kristin - if you had subpoenaed email records and your opponent not only deleted 30,000 emails but then also bleached washed the drive, what kind of penalty would you be asking for? How would you feel if the judge and your opponent were colluding to agree to overlook the crime.
It all depends on details which have not yet been made public. I have always maintained that she is corrupt. Sad that the GOP couldn't put up a serious candidate and picked a reality TV Bozo who is more dangerous as POTUS than little Ms. Corrupt.
-
It all depends on details which have not yet been made public. I have always maintained that she is corrupt. Sad that the GOP couldn't put up a serious candidate and picked a reality TV Bozo who is more dangerous as POTUS than little Ms. Corrupt.
Trying to equate Trump with one of the nutjob "reality" people like Kardasians is a FAIL.
-
Yeah, Trump said bad things!!!
-
It all depends on details which have not yet been made public. I have always maintained that she is corrupt. Sad that the GOP couldn't put up a serious candidate and picked a reality TV Bozo who is more dangerous as POTUS than little Ms. Corrupt.
Again, first and foremost, Trump is a REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, and business man. Yes, he had a TV show. Do you remember what the topic was? BUSINESS.
Hilary is far more dangerous than Trump. Look at her track record when she was secretary of state. Russia - disaster. Benghazi - disaster. Kaddafi - disaster. Relations with China - disaster. What did she do as a carpet bagger Senator in NY?
-
Again, first and foremost, Trump is a REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, and business man. Yes, he had a TV show. Do you remember what the topic was? BUSINESS.
Hilary is far more dangerous than Trump. Look at her track record when she was secretary of state. Russia - disaster. Benghazi - disaster. Kaddafi - disaster. Relations with China - disaster. What did she do as a carpet bagger Senator in NY?
It's not even HIS show, he was recruited by Mark Burnett.
-
It's not even HIS show, he was recruited by Mark Burnett.
Because both knew it would make money.
-
Because both knew it would make money.
Absolutely.
-
A private server run by the RNC is not subject to FOIA. That is the whole point of a private server.
Nice deflection. You need to stick to suing airlines for frivolous crap.
-
Making money and being successful is evil. Better to sit home, smoke pot, and complain about over achievers.
-
Nice deflection. You need to stick to suing airlines for frivolous crap.
This message brought to you by Mr. Anonymous™.
-
A private server run by the RNC is not subject to FOIA. That is the whole point of a private server.
No, but it's subject to subpoena if it is being used to avoid FOIA or for any other unlawful matter.
-
Anyone waiting to see Hillary or Bill frogmarched on TV for any reason is going to be sorely disappointed, they are so far above the law the Gambino crime family is trying to get Bill to provide some 'training' courses, from cigars to Bleachbit and everywhere in between.
'Gimp
-
This message brought to you by Mr. Anonymous™.
Funny how you seem to take offense to my postings and how I use the anonymity here, but yet it doesn't bother you for all the rest that use the same feature.
You need to take your self righteous bullshit elsewhere.
-
Funny how you seem to take offense to my postings and how I use the anonymity here, but yet it doesn't bother you for all the rest that use the same feature.
You need to take your self righteous bullshit elsewhere.
You're mistaken. I'm not at all offended. But many of us have the guts to post in the open. And while that seems to exacerbate ad hominem attacks from folks like you, it does make it fun to point out your apparent lack of fortitude. ;)
-
A private server run by the RNC is not subject to FOIA. That is the whole point of a private server.
Incorrect. It is not the location but the content that makes it subject to public disclosure. By your argument, I could avoid disclosure of a public bidding process just by having everyone exchange documents on a personal email service. Certainly you can see how this contradicts the reason for FOIA?
-
You're mistaken. I'm not at all offended. But many of us have the guts to post in the open. And while that seems to exacerbate ad hominem attacks from folks like you, it does make it fun to point out your apparent lack of fortitude. ;)
Pot, meet kettle.
-
Anyone waiting to see Hillary or Bill frogmarched on TV for any reason is going to be sorely disappointed, they are so far above the law the Gambino crime family is trying to get Bill to provide some 'training' courses, from cigars to Bleachbit and everywhere in between.
'Gimp
Not only that, but a former president and a former senator and secretary of state on trial would be terrible for the country. I say indict then an immediate pardon after an agreement to cease and desist collecting more money and an agreement to not seek any other elected office would be best solution.
-
Not only that, but a former president and a former senator and secretary of state on trial would be terrible for the country. I say indict then an immediate pardon after an agreement to cease and desist collecting more money and an agreement to not seek any other elected office would be best solution.
I disagree. Having a former president or secretary of state on trial might be exactly what we need. We are rapidly heading toward the destruction of the rule of law if we are not already there. A slap on the wrist is not what we need, we need a reaffirmation that everyone is a citizen first. Nobody gets a pass.
But I agree that it is unlikely to happen. Keep your powder dry, you're going to need it.
-
I disagree. Having a former president or secretary of state on trial might be exactly what we need. We are rapidly heading toward the destruction of the rule of law if we are not already there. A slap on the wrist is not what we need, we need a reaffirmation that everyone is a citizen first. Nobody gets a pass.
But I agree that it is unlikely to happen. Keep your powder dry, you're going to need it.
We need a total house cleaning, with the garbage being taken to the curb. I don't care how nasty it looks.
-
We need a total house cleaning, with the garbage being taken to the curb. I don't care how nasty it looks.
Will never happen unless there's revolution, we're already too far down the rabbit hole.
-
Will never happen unless there's revolution, we're already too far down the rabbit hole.
Yep, the millionaires and lawyers that populate congress will never let term limits be passed, never.
-
I disagree. Having a former president or secretary of state on trial might be exactly what we need. We are rapidly heading toward the destruction of the rule of law if we are not already there. A slap on the wrist is not what we need, we need a reaffirmation that everyone is a citizen first. Nobody gets a pass.
But I agree that it is unlikely to happen. Keep your powder dry, you're going to need it.
I agree on all counts. The lawbreaking isn't even covered up anymore. The left just "knows" that they won't be held responsible.
-
Yep, the millionaires and lawyers that populate congress will never let term limits be passed, never.
Get your state legislators to get off their ass and pass a resolution to participate in an Article V Convention of the States, and a term limit amendment will bypass Congress entirely.
That's the beauty of what the Founders gave us. They knew that this day would come, and they gave us a second way to assert the power of the People.
-
I agree on all counts. The lawbreaking isn't even covered up anymore. The left just "knows" that they won't be held responsible.
-
Get your state legislators to get off their ass and pass a resolution to participate in an Article V Convention of the States, and a term limit amendment will bypass Congress entirely.
That's the beauty of what the Founders gave us. They knew that this day would come, and they gave us a second way to assert the power of the People.
Doubtful. My state senator, a "Republican" co-sponsored, with a Democrat, a gas tax increase bill ($.30 MORE per gallon). It was signed by our then "Republican" Governor. I guess he thought it would garner him bipartisan support in his upcoming re-election campaign. It didn't. We have a Democrat governor now, in the Obama/Hillary mold.
Oh yeah, the money from the tax increase was supposed to go to road, and bridge repair, but in reality is going to public transportation union wage increases and "green" buses.
-
Get your state legislators to get off their ass and pass a resolution to participate in an Article V Convention of the States, and a term limit amendment will bypass Congress entirely.
That's the beauty of what the Founders gave us. They knew that this day would come, and they gave us a second way to assert the power of the People.
Except the state legislators are also polluted with the same mentality, and many of those aspire to the national level (congress). It's a cash cow due to voter apathy that keeps these slugs in office.
The state people are not going to piss off the national people (political party) because they know which side their bread is buttered on.
Politics today is like winning the lottery, once in and established many realize wealth that they could never achieve on the private side.
-
Doubtful. My state senator, a "Republican" co-sponsored, with a Democrat, a gas tax increase bill ($.30 MORE per gallon). It was signed by our then "Republican" Governor. I guess he thought it would garner him bipartisan support in his upcoming re-election campaign. It didn't. We have a Democrat governor now, in the Obama/Hillary mold.
Oh yeah, the money from the tax increase was supposed to go to road, and bridge repair, but in reality is going to public transportation union wage increases and "green" buses.
Good news! Governors are NOT involved in an Article V convention. Only the legislatures of two thirds of the states to call a convention, and the legislatures of three fourths of the states to ratify the results.
-
Except the state legislators are also polluted with the same mentality, and many of those aspire to the national level (congress). It's a cash cow due to voter apathy that keeps these slugs in office.
The state people are not going to piss off the national people (political party) because they know which side their bread is buttered on.
Politics today is like winning the lottery, once in and established many realize wealth that they could never achieve on the private side.
I have two friends, one was my roommate when I was just out of school, and started working full time. One eventually became a U.S. Congressmen, and one became a U.S. Senator. Both eventually were voted out of office after serving multiple terms. Both became wealthy in office, then out of office as LOBBYISTS. That's where they really are making money. Influence peddling. It is exactly like winning the lottery. It is all about personal gain with these guys.
-
More of "The laws don't apply to us, only to the little people"
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/attorney-general-lynch-pleads-fifth-secret-iran-ransom-payments/
Attorney General Loretta Lynch is declining to comply with an investigation by leading members of Congress about the Obama administration’s secret efforts to send Iran $1.7 billion in cash earlier this year, prompting accusations that Lynch has “pleaded the Fifth” Amendment to avoid incriminating herself over these payments, according to lawmakers and communications exclusively obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
-
More of "The laws don't apply to us, only to the little people"
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/attorney-general-lynch-pleads-fifth-secret-iran-ransom-payments/
Nothing to see here, move along. RACIST!!!!!
-
Nothing to see here, move along. RACIST!!!!!
I'm a deplorable, thank you very much.
-
Again, first and foremost, Trump is a REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, and business man. Yes, he had a TV show. Do you remember what the topic was? BUSINESS.
The reality TV show was instrumental in helping him buck up his fortunes after a string of financial disasters such as airlines and casinos. The TV show allowed him to rehabilitate the brand and he has been making much of his money just licensing his brand. After this election he is going to need to rehabilitate his brand yet again as it has suffered in this campaign.
]quote]Hilary is far more dangerous than Trump. Look at her track record when she was secretary of state. Russia - disaster. Benghazi - disaster. Kaddafi - disaster. Relations with China - disaster. What did she do as a carpet bagger Senator in NY?
[/quote]
Oh yes! I forgot. It was Hillary's idea that Putin invade the Ukraine and annex Crimea. How stupid of me. And of course any politician would have been smart enough to kowtow to the Chinese and let them have the South China Sea.
I am sure that Trump with fix everything with Putin. There is no problem there that can't be solved by abandoning NATO and giving Putin the Baltic states.
-
Nice deflection. You need to stick to suing airlines for frivolous crap.
I was a defense dog for the airlines.
-
It appears Comey is reopening the investigation of Hillary, based upon new information - 10 days before the election.
-
It appears Comey is reopening the investigation of Hillary, based upon new information - 10 days before the election.
Rut Row........
-
I'm a deplorable, thank you very much.
Well played, sir.
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161028/a9cc6b7594f93483f207cfd61eeee7a8.jpg)
-
Incorrect. It is not the location but the content that makes it subject to public disclosure. By your argument, I could avoid disclosure of a public bidding process just by having everyone exchange documents on a personal email service. Certainly you can see how this contradicts the reason for FOIA?
Not incorrect. The RNC doesn't even have to answer a FOIA request. Now one could go to the State Department and Secretary Powell would have been supposed to have turned over any business related emails, but if he says that all the ones on the RNC server are private and don't involve government business, that is the end of the FOIA.
-
Rut Row........
https://jonathanturley.org/2016/10/28/comey-sends-letter-to-congress-citing-new-evidence-and-an-investigation-in-the-clinton-email-scandal/
-
I think many in Washington are beginning to sense a turning of the tide and are running for cover.
As for me, I early voted today. One hour and twenty minute wait. The poll workers were saying they are seeing record turnout this year.
And while I was in line chatting, I kept hearing the same theme over and over:
"I'm voting this year because I'm honestly afraid of what will happen to our country"
Elderly lady in front of me told me she was voting Trump, and she hasn't voted since the 80's. Couple behind me said they were disgusted with their Obamacare premiums. Middle age school teacher just behind them was "feed up with the PC culture" among other things.
And when asked if they are watching the news (MSM) everyone said basically "What's the point?"
Gonna get interesting in a few days.
-
https://jonathanturley.org/2016/10/28/comey-sends-letter-to-congress-citing-new-evidence-and-an-investigation-in-the-clinton-email-scandal/
One has to wonder what is going on behind the scenes. Perhaps the Clinton Machine has pushed Comey too far, and he's finally said "Screw it" and is going for a little payback.
Then again, he could realize that come January he may be working for President Trump and find his ass being removed from office.
-
Not incorrect. The RNC doesn't even have to answer a FOIA request. Now one could go to the State Department and Secretary Powell would have been supposed to have turned over any business related emails, but if he says that all the ones on the RNC server are private and don't involve government business, that is the end of the FOIA.
incorrect.
-
https://jonathanturley.org/2016/10/28/comey-sends-letter-to-congress-citing-new-evidence-and-an-investigation-in-the-clinton-email-scandal/
Well, well, well.... the last laugh has not yet been laughed.
Of all the stuff laid at Hillary's feet, the e-mails with the link between the Foundation/Bill/Sec'ty of State might turn out to be the one.
If one thing is true about the Clintons, they had a paranoid obsession with secrecy, that may be their undoing.
-
I think many in Washington are beginning to sense a turning of the tide and are running for cover.
As for me, I early voted today. One hour and twenty minute wait. The poll workers were saying they are seeing record turnout this year.
And while I was in line chatting, I kept hearing the same theme over and over:
"I'm voting this year because I'm honestly afraid of what will happen to our country"
Elderly lady in front of me told me she was voting Trump, and she hasn't voted since the 80's. Couple behind me said they were disgusted with their Obamacare premiums. Middle age school teacher just behind them was "feed up with the PC culture" among other things.
And when asked if they are watching the news (MSM) everyone said basically "What's the point?"
Gonna get interesting in a few days.
What state do you live in if you don't mind me asking?
-
Not incorrect. The RNC doesn't even have to answer a FOIA request. Now one could go to the State Department and Secretary Powell would have been supposed to have turned over any business related emails, but if he says that all the ones on the RNC server are private and don't involve government business, that is the end of the FOIA.
The judges are disagreeing with you. There is plenty of recent decisions that contradict what you just said. Government business conducted on private services is still public business and must be disclosed. Conversely, private business conducted on government servers MAY be privileged to stay private, but it's less likely. That case involved union communications which were held to be private and not in the public domain.
Otherwise - back to my example of conducting shady business on private servers and nobody can touch it. But they have touched it, so reality is not meshing.
-
It appears Comey is reopening the investigation of Hillary, based upon new information - 10 days before the election.
Do you think this matters one bit? Other than if she has pissed Obama off, it might result in a President Kaine rather than a President Clinton.
If Trump would drop out, we would have a President Pence, hands down. But the idiot is caught up in his ego and will go down with his ego. Hope he is well diversified because his real estate business is about to tank.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/29/us/politics/fbi-hillary-clinton-email.html?_r=0
Federal law enforcement officials said Friday that the new emails uncovered in the closed investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server were discovered after the F.B.I. seized electronic devices belonging to Huma Abedin, a top aide to Mrs. Clinton, and her husband, Anthony Weiner.
The F.B.I. is investigating illicit text messages that Mr. Weiner sent to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina. The bureau told Congress on Friday that it had uncovered new emails related to the Clinton case — one federal official said they numbered in the thousands — potentially reigniting an issue that has weighed on the presidential campaign and offering a lifeline to Donald J. Trump less than two weeks before the election.
In a letter to Congress, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said that emails had surfaced in an unrelated case, and that they “appear to be pertinent to the investigation.”
-
Well, well, well.... the last laugh has not yet been laughed.
Of all the stuff laid at Hillary's feet, the e-mails with the link between the Foundation/Bill/Sec'ty of State might turn out to be the one.
If one thing is true about the Clintons, they had a paranoid obsession with secrecy, that may be their undoing.
That usually the case, isn't it?
-
That usually the case, isn't it?
Particularly in politics! Since I do not have all the resources that the FBI has, have not read all the emails, nor the legal background to draw judgement on the nuances of the law, I'll be very interested in where these came from and how they are relevant.
It does bother me a bit that we are all coming to conclusions from a set of emails that were criminally obtained. (This applies only to the WikiLeaks emails)
-
It does bother me a bit that we are all coming to conclusions from a set of emails that were criminally obtained. (This applies only to the WikiLeaks emails)
Why? We aren't trying this in a court of law.
-
Why? We aren't trying this in a court of law.
Yes, that is true. They are being used in the court of public opinion. Dunno, can't be taken back and the public will do whatever they wish, just strikes me as somehow wrong.
-
Particularly in politics! Since I do not have all the resources that the FBI has, have not read all the emails, nor the legal background to draw judgement on the nuances of the law, I'll be very interested in where these came from and how they are relevant.
It does bother me a bit that we are all coming to conclusions from a set of emails that were criminally obtained. (This applies only to the WikiLeaks emails)
I certainly don't know either. However, for Comey to send a letter to Congress to update his testimony and effectively reopen an investigation that he said in September would not be reopened, 10 days out, is meaningful.
Comey appeared to quash this in September. Done. Over. Nothing to see here.
Now something significant must have happened. Did his agents threaten him? Is there shit in the Wiki releases that implicate him in unethical or illegal activities?
Something really smells about this.
-
It does bother me a bit that we are all coming to conclusions from a set of emails that were criminally obtained. (This applies only to the WikiLeaks emails)
so?
How much have people concluded about US policy and actions based on US Secrets illegally revealed?
-
Maybe Hitlary will finally be taken down by a Weiner:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cv4wr2pVUAILBd6.jpg)
Somehow, it's quite poetic.
-
It does bother me a bit that we are all coming to conclusions from a set of emails that were criminally obtained. (This applies only to the WikiLeaks emails)
Honestly, though, is there anything, anything at ALL, in the emails that surprises anyone? They merely lend a somewhat oblique "veritas" to that which has already been shown to us by the observable actions of parties involved.
If you go all misty eyed and voluble about a certain airplane, I don't need to read your diary to know you're in love. :)
-
Get your state legislators to get off their ass and pass a resolution to participate in an Article V Convention of the States, and a term limit amendment will bypass Congress entirely.
That's the beauty of what the Founders gave us. They knew that this day would come, and they gave us a second way to assert the power of the People.
I live in a state, Massachusetts, where there are so many assholes who vote, they elected a guy who was a representative for 20+ years and didn't live here, they elected this guy senator. Oh, and during his 20+ years as a rep, he did nothing. No chance of any of my representatives voting for term limits.
-
so?
How much have people concluded about US policy and actions based on US Secrets illegally revealed?
Understand... sure lots of public opinion has been formed over documents illegally revealed. Not trying to change anyone's mind, just that it find it wrong.
-
Understand... sure lots of public opinion has been formed over documents illegally revealed. Not trying to change anyone's mind, just that it find it wrong.
Karma's a bitch.
-
I certainly don't know either. However, for Comey to send a letter to Congress to update his testimony and effectively reopen an investigation that he said in September would not be reopened, 10 days out, is meaningful.
Comey appeared to quash this in September. Done. Over. Nothing to see here.
Now something significant must have happened. Did his agents threaten him? Is there shit in the Wiki releases that implicate him in unethical or illegal activities?
Something really smells about this.
Note that Comey was very careful in the wording of his letter. Doesn't mention "re-opening the investigation" only that they will "take appropriate steps designed to allow investigators to review these e-mails to determine if they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation". Kinda vague, but I can understand Comey's desire to send the letter.
Who knows what the basis or reasoning is, but I'm sure there will be lots of theories!
-
Odds are it will be revealed that Weiner rented a house on Nantucket for a couple of nights so he and his pals could frolic with a gaggle of 15-year-old girls hired for the occasion.
But all the girls claimed they had a similar party with Trump the week before. Or in 1972. You know. So Anthony claims he never partook of the girls' charms, but cleverly set up the whole reveal to help save the country from Trump!
-
I live in a state, Massachusetts, where there are so many assholes who vote, they elected a guy who was a representative for 20+ years and didn't live here, they elected this guy senator. Oh, and during his 20+ years as a rep, he did nothing. No chance of any of my representatives voting for term limits.
A state legislator and state senator who didn't live in Massachusetts?
-
So Anthony claims he never partook of the girls' charms, but cleverly set up the whole reveal to help save the country from Trump.
Hey, leave my girls out of this OK?
:)
-
Yes, that is true. They are being used in the court of public opinion. Dunno, can't be taken back and the public will do whatever they wish, just strikes me as somehow wrong.
How did the Trump/Billy Bush tape strike you?
-
Well, well, well.... the last laugh has not yet been laughed.
Of all the stuff laid at Hillary's feet, the e-mails with the link between the Foundation/Bill/Sec'ty of State might turn out to be the one.
If one thing is true about the Clintons, they had a paranoid obsession with secrecy, that may be their undoing.
I honestly wonder about Comey. He might be doing this simply because he knows he lied to Congress under oath and there are emails about to surface that will prove it. How better to deflect than to toss Congress the biggest crook in the country?
-
Particularly in politics! Since I do not have all the resources that the FBI has, have not read all the emails, nor the legal background to draw judgement on the nuances of the law, I'll be very interested in where these came from and how they are relevant.
It does bother me a bit that we are all coming to conclusions from a set of emails that were criminally obtained. (This applies only to the WikiLeaks emails)
I find it beyond believable that the entire federal investigative branch is helpless when trying to find these things, but a couple of guys have no trouble what-so-ever.
-
The judges are disagreeing with you. There is plenty of recent decisions that contradict what you just said. Government business conducted on private services is still public business and must be disclosed. Conversely, private business conducted on government servers MAY be privileged to stay private, but it's less likely. That case involved union communications which were held to be private and not in the public domain.
Otherwise - back to my example of conducting shady business on private servers and nobody can touch it. But they have touched it, so reality is not meshing.
I agree with what you said, but that doesn't contradict what I said. What I said was that a FOIA request can't go to the RNC. That doesn't mean that a FOIA request to the appropriate government agency wouldn't require an official, like Powell, to disclose government related emails even if they are on the RNC server, but in that case, the official acts as the gatekeeper.
-
How did the Trump/Billy Bush tape strike you?
Well... the Trump/Billy Bush tape wasn't stolen..
As an isolated incident, would have shrugged it off as two guys trash talking and boasting. The Donald is all about the Donald, don't believe he even realizes the significance of some of the things he says.
-
Well... the Trump/Billy Bush tape wasn't stolen..
Recording someone without their knowledge and consent is against the law.
Try again.
-
Recording someone without their knowledge and consent is against the law.
Try again.
Not in most states. Try again.
-
I've always wondered what else is on that tape. We've heard only the part they wanted us to hear.
-
Not in most states. Try again.
Nor was it recorded without knowledge and consent. It was a behind the scenes interview.
-
Nor was it recorded without knowledge and consent. It was a behind the scenes interview.
It happened in California I believe. And in California it is illegal to record a conversation without consent. California is a two party consent state. See Cal. Penal Code § 632.
The interview had not started, and the conversation was caught "hot mic".
Now NBC has never released the full tape, so we don't know everything that was said beforehand.
-
The interview had not started, and the conversation was caught "hot mic".
But the microphones were set up and there was a camera on them. That certainly is not a situation where someone has a reasonable right to expect not to be recorded especially if they were there to be recorded. The argument that he didn't consent falls flat.
There was some kind of interview release contract involved. Typically it would state that the recorded images and words may be used without further compensation but it does not specify a time frame. If you are there to do an interview then you expect that you will be recorded.
I find the double standard of NBC rubbing their hands with glee over having the tape while simultaneously condemning Billy Bush and maybe firing him to be typical Leftist hypocrisy.
-
But the microphones were set up and there was a camera on them. That certainly is not a situation where someone has a reasonable right to expect not to be recorded especially if they were there to be recorded. The argument that he didn't consent falls flat.
There was some kind of interview release contract involved. Typically it would state that the recorded images and words may be used without further compensation but it does not specify a time frame. If you are there to do an interview then you expect that you will be recorded.
I find the double standard of NBC rubbing their hands with glee over having the tape while simultaneously condemning Billy Bush and maybe firing him to be typical Leftist hypocrisy.
Apparently you were there and are witness to things no one else are. ::)
The conversation was recorded "hot mic" off scene while they were in a dressing room bus. Again, no one (well, obviously you) knows what else was said during that event while in the bus. Did Bush bait him into the remarks? Did Bush make equal or worse remarks? We don't know.
I'm sure they used a standard industry contract. That contract does give the network use of his audio and video, during the agreed upon broadcast. It does not give blanket consent off camera. Unless you can provide a contract that does?
This goes along the same line that the NYT posted tax returns without the consent of Mr Trump. And that is illegal as well. Had Fox posted returns of Hillary that she didn't publicly release I can assure you lawsuits would be filed, and the MSM would run 24/7 coverage with "outrage".
-
I'm sure they used a standard industry contract. That contract does give the network use of his audio and video, during the agreed upon broadcast. It does not give blanket consent off camera. Unless you can provide a contract that does?
I cannot find the release form from my last interview, but I do know that it contained nothing about time or place of what they would use. Now that was just a trade magazine interview and to my knowledge it was not recorded. But I assumed that everything about my contact with them was subject to being published.
Trump was an idiot and the faster you can accept that and move on, the better. It's better to have an idiot in the White House than a criminal.
-
snip
I'm sure they used a standard industry contract. That contract does give the network use of his audio and video, during the agreed upon broadcast. It does not give blanket consent off camera. Unless you can provide a contract that does?
Why are you sure they used a standard contract?
I know that in a very large portion of my legal dealings, my attorney's almost always tossed the "standard" contract and substituted one of our own. It generally included all the provisions the standard one used, maybe slightly altered, but it would also include some additional provisions to protect my interests, which were not stated in the standard contract.
I imagine Trump had attorney's review virtually all of the contracts he signed and I doubt he signed too many standard contracts "as is".
-
I cannot find the release form from my last interview, but I do know that it contained nothing about time or place of what they would use. Now that was just a trade magazine interview and to my knowledge it was not recorded. But I assumed that everything about my contact with them was subject to being published.
Trump was an idiot and the faster you can accept that and move on, the better. It's better to have an idiot in the White House than a criminal.
Last I checked, no one is perfect. We all make mistakes, say things we wish we never did, etc. And most people have private conversations that are never intended for public consumption.
Recording people behind the scenes is wrong.
-
Recording people behind the scenes is wrong.
But hacking their e-mails and releasing them is fantastic!
What a hypocrite! Can't say I'm surprised that a Trumpkin has zero logical consistency to their arguments.
-
Why are you sure they used a standard contract?
I know that in a very large portion of my legal dealings, my attorney's almost always tossed the "standard" contract and substituted one of our own. It generally included all the provisions the standard one used, maybe slightly altered, but it would also include some additional provisions to protect my interests, which were not stated in the standard contract.
I imagine Trump had attorney's review virtually all of the contracts he signed and I doubt he signed too many standard contracts "as is".
I imagine that if Trump had any possible language in the media release contract that would have covered hot mic recording then he would have already filed the lawsuit citing damage to his reputation and future career opportunities. It would have been a strong refutation of the recording and he could have used to courts to suppress it immediately.
But he didn't. Which means he thinks it's probably permissible to have been recorded.
-
I imagine that if Trump had any possible language in the media release contract that would have covered hot mic recording then he would have already filed the lawsuit citing damage to his reputation and future career opportunities. It would have been a strong refutation of the recording and he could have used to courts to suppress it immediately.
But he didn't. Which means he thinks it's probably permissible to have been recorded.
WAS in progress here (wild ass speculation)
Again, obviously you have information others don't.
-
Again, obviously you have information others don't.
I believe it would be more accurate to say that I have experience that others don't. I have been interviewed before and I know 1) they never get it right and 2) they will use anything that you say at any time...so don't say stupid stuff.
-
I believe it would be more accurate to say that I have experience that others don't. I have been interviewed before and I know 1) they never get it right and 2) they will use anything that you say at any time...so don't say stupid stuff.
On most programs the guest is fitted with a microphone and then held in a room before coming out to be interviewed. We've heard this referred to as the "green room" or "blue room", whatever.
One would have a reasonable expectation of privacy in this setting before going on camera. I've never heard anybody be told "Oh, btw, we will turn your mic on while you are waiting and be recording your conversation before coming out".
Nor do we see a televised interview starting out with "Ladies and Gentlemen, we have on our program tonight Robby Mook to discuss yet another Hillary scandal, but while he was waiting to come on we recorded this comment he said to his aid in our green room!"
Again, as others have stated, let's hear the whole tape, unedited, that NBC has. There is a reason it was selectively edited.
-
Do we really think this was recorded with the wireless mic that he might have been equipped with? Don't you think it would be a stretch that the transmitter could hit the receiver from a trailer?
-
Come on. I can't be the only one to have this scene on my mind:
https://youtu.be/QyVwxmzNjHc
-
Come on. I can't be the only one to have this scene on my mind:
https://youtu.be/QyVwxmzNjHc
Excellent!!
-
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/10/31/could-donald-trump-sue-nbc.html
-
The rats are starting to jump ship
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/30/democrat_doug_schoen_is_reconsidering_his_support_for_hillary_clinton_because_of_fbi.html
As you know, I have been a supporter of Secretary Clinton... But given that this investigation is going to go on for many months after the election... But if the Secretary of State wins, we will have a president under criminal investigation, with Huma Abedin under criminal investigation, with the Secretary of State, the president-elect, should she win under investigation.
Harris, under these circumstances, I am actively reassessing my support
This is obstruction of justice. Nobody with any character wants to have anything to do with it.
-
The rats are starting to jump ship
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/30/democrat_doug_schoen_is_reconsidering_his_support_for_hillary_clinton_because_of_fbi.html
This is obstruction of justice. Nobody with any character wants to have anything to do with it.
If he supported her in the first place, he should evaluate his own core values.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
Hearing that CNN is distancing itself from Donna Brazille. Wikileaks stuff showing she shared more than one debate question.
-
Hearing that CNN is distancing itself from Donna Brazille. Wikileaks stuff showing she shared more than one debate question.
I'm confused. Before each debate, the moderators made clear that THEY were the only ones who knew what the questions were. How did Donna Brazille get them?
:)
-
I'm confused. Before each debate, the moderators made clear that THEY were the only ones who knew what the questions were. How did Donna Brazille get them?
:)
Someone lied :)