Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
S.Leeper
Social climber
somewhere that doesnt have anything over 90'
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:24am PT
|
Giuliani (Gollum)
Ha Ha! LOLLEd on that one!!
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:28am PT
|
John, I posted factual corruption in the Reagan years, you posted opinions. You are better than that.
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:36am PT
|
John, I posted factual corruption in the Reagan years, you posted opinions. You are better than that.
For some reason, I though John E was a lawyer, but a lawyer would know that accusations of wrongdoing and convictions (legal proof) of wrongdoing are completely different things.
Curt
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:44am PT
|
The request was for evidence, not convictions. The odious Clinton apparatus has gone all-out to prevent - or at least postpone - convictions. The FBI investigation was particularly curious, because they interviewed Clinton last, not first. Normally, the FBI interviews the target first, before he or she can change the story. If they tell the truth, and they committed a crime, they get them on their admission. If they lie, and others provide contrary evidence, they get them for lying to the FBI.
Also, no one apparently asked her in the investigation if she sent or received classified information on her server. If she said yes, she admitted criminal activity. If she said no, she lied to the FBI. Either way, she would have been led away in handcuffs if she were an ordinary citizen.
This strikes me as a mere continuation of the gripes for the Hillary apologists about comments about Clinton's lies. She's demonstrated her proclivity again this week, and I still hear protests about how unfair the perceptino of her untruthfulness is.
No one, certainly not me, is asking you to believe that Clinton is corrupt. Intelligent people can look at evidence and reach different conclusions, but your protests about the alleged lack of evidence ignores reality.
John
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:45am PT
|
"For some reason, I though John E was a lawyer, but a lawyer would know that accusations of wrongdoing and convictions (legal proof) of wrongdoing are completely different things.
Curt"
But, but I heard Rush and Hannity say...
|
|
Larry Nelson
Social climber
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:47am PT
|
Craig posted
Hopefully we can do some research on him to see who's billionaire tit he's sucking on.
Craig,
You can't really say that of Trump,
but you certainly could say that of Hillary.
Soros, Steyer, Buffet, Silicon Valley tycoons, Goldman Sachs and Wall St.
I suppose they're good billionaires who use massive amounts of money for their political views.
Here is a good article from a lefty...
"In the pairing of Trump and Clinton, we confront symptoms of something pathological. Unless Americans identify the sources of this disease, it will inevitably worsen, with dire consequences in the realm of national security."
http://billmoyers.com/story/decay-american-politics/
Go Johnson/Weld
Edit: I hope they let Johnson and Stein into the debates
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:55am PT
|
I should probably add that when one is litigating fraud and corruption, one usually deals with circumstantial evidence. I have litigated innumerable cases under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(2), which deals with debts not discharged in bankruptcy because they are based on fraud. I don't think I've ever seen a defendant admit that they lied to the creditor. Instead, I would present evidence of financial statements they made before and after bankruptcy, to see how they differ, or evidence of their overall (dire) financial situation when they filled out their credit application saying they could pay for that million dollars of product the supplier delivered, etc. If I represented the defendant, I would present evidence showing that an objective debtor had reason to believe their statements accurately reflected their financial condition, etc. No one put any weight on whether or not the defendants said they did it.
The reference to "Clinton Cash" on You Tube is obviously circumstantial evidence, and those inclined to treat the Clintons generously can dismiss all of it, but those of us jaundiced by our experience to the contrary find the unusually high Clinton speaking fees or unusually large donations to the Foundation immediately followed by favorable treatment from the State Department rather unlikely to be mere coincidence.
John
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 11:58am PT
|
I am voting Green Party this year
In other words, you're voting for trump and two or three fringe-right Supreme Court justices.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:03pm PT
|
I rather suspect Norton's tongue is firmly in his cheek, but I'm voting for Johnson/Weld, so I guess I'm voting for two or three fringe leftist SCOTUS appointments.
John
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:04pm PT
|
Also, no one apparently asked her in the investigation if she sent or received classified information on her server. If she said yes, she admitted criminal activity. If she said no, she lied to the FBI. Either way, she would have been led away in handcuffs if she were an ordinary citizen.
If she received classified information, but it was not so marked, and she did not know that it was classified....would it be a lie to say that she did not?
Does not a lie require knowledge of the falseness of the given statement?
Apparently, she did receive classified information of two types:
1. It was not marked in the standardized format, so as to be known;
2. It was classified AFTER THE FACT, but was not at the time of transmission.
In any case, both of the people involved in the email were cleared to have the information, and to discuss the information. No violation there.
Also, John, your assertion that the question was never asked is incredible. How could a good Republican FBI director allow that to happen???
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:05pm PT
|
The reference to "Clinton Cash" on You Tube is obviously circumstantial evidence, and those inclined to treat the Clintons generously can dismiss all of it, but those of us jaundiced by our experience to the contrary find the unusually high Clinton speaking fees or unusually large donations to the Foundation immediately followed by favorable treatment from the State Department rather unlikely to be mere coincidence.
John
Looks like dog sh#t... smells like dog sh#t...
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:05pm PT
|
No one, certainly not me, is asking you to believe that Clinton is corrupt. Intelligent people can look at evidence and reach different conclusions, but your protests about the alleged lack of evidence ignores reality.
There is certainly evidence--but only flimsy evidence--and that is the entire point. The "evidence" is inadequate to prove any wrongdoing. Except, of course, in the minds of Hillary hating Republicans.
Curt
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:10pm PT
|
We should ask VINCE Foster what he thinks. Wait....what?
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:11pm PT
|
The FBI investigation was particularly curious, because they interviewed Clinton last, not first. Normally, the FBI interviews the target first, before he or she can change the story.
Obviously, you have no experience with investigations of high gov't officials, perhaps just Martha Stewart?
With Nixon (you may have heard of Watergate?), EVERYONE else was interviewed, other than Nixon.
With the Contra Affair, was Reagan interviewed first? NO.
There have been several high profile issues with leading Generals, and they were always interviewed after everyone else.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:17pm PT
|
"Looks like dog sh#t... smells like dog sh#t..."
Like the majority of your posts Skippy.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:18pm PT
|
We should ask VINCE Foster what he thinks. Wait....what?
Fer chrissake, can you please stop recycling this dipshit conspiracy nonsense and let the poor man rest in peace?
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:21pm PT
|
One of the things that occurs to me, is the FACT that women are usually at a disadvantage in competing against men. It is said that to be treated equally, a woman has to be twice as good as the equivalent man. In my experience, this is so.
So we come to the case of Hillary Clinton. She is running for the office of President.
As we all know, the key to elections is fundraising. Hillary has been extraordinarily successful in this regard----except that it gets highlighted as "corruption" in her specific case.
As we all know, the family of the President does not get rich in office, and in some cases, comes out of office struggling financially. We also know that unless previously wealthy (W as an example), they tend to "cash in" on the celebrity factor in speaking fees. First ladies, too.
But UNIQUELY in Hillary's case, this is an example of "corruption". Check out the speaking fees for Laura Bush, or Barbara Bush.
This really strikes me as another example of an attack on a candidate, simply because she is a woman, doing the EXACT same things as equivalent men, where their actions are not criticized AT ALL.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:33pm PT
|
Theories of a cover-up persisted, however,[22] some of which were promulgated by the Arkansas Project.[23] The speculation and conspiracy theories featured on talk radio and elsewhere caused pain to the Foster family.[12] After a three-year investigation, Whitewater independent counsel Ken Starr[22] released a report on October 10, 1997, also concluding that the death was a suicide.[14][24] In response,
Sheila Foster Anthony, sister of Vince, said that she agreed with Starr's findings but criticized his investigation for having taken so long, thus contributing to the existence of "ridiculous conspiracy theories proffered by those with a profit or political motive".[24]
Esco, inasmuch as a google search on "Vince Foster" will bring up your comment, thanks for contributing to the agony of a family. Perhaps when something happens to you, our community can do all within it's powers to make sure that your remaining family is maximally hurt, embarrassed, and angered.
|
|
S.Leeper
Social climber
somewhere that doesnt have anything over 90'
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:35pm PT
|
Very well put, Crankster.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2016 - 12:47pm PT
|
Bottom line time?
Hillary is President, the House remains Republican
the Senate is very much up in the air, could go either way based on current polling
If the Dems get the Senate probably using Tim Kaine as VP to break tie some judicial appointment get done
if Republicans hold the Senate the Supreme Court continues short a Justice as they refuse to consider a Hillary nominee
no legislation gets passed benefiting anyone, just continuing funding resolutions and threats by the House to shut down the government
so it remains a mess, but no country gets invaded on a lie, we keep drone killing guys,
the shareholders of the military supplying industry continue to accrue massive riches,
everybody pretty much pisses and moans and the years go by, no asteroid hits the earth
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!