The People VS. Evita, Criminal Case File

[KorbenDallas]

11 minutes ago, SteveWolfer said:

I'd love to see the Inspector General's office publically declare that based up the report given by the Director of the FBI that Hillary Clinton's security clearance had been revoked.  Then let her campaign staff try to explain how she could be president without a security clearance.

It'd be great if they revoked it mid-flight with her on Air Force One and subsequently booted her ass out the back without a parachute.

Edited July 5, 2016 by KorbenDallas
#PissedOff

[william.scherk]

48 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

Trump is still beating the #RiggedSystem drum, but it's unclear how many people he can round up to vote for him.

Yup. It is way too early to be platting political graves, I think. There are vampire-zombies to account for, metaphorically. 

The challenges dealt the Trump campaign are multiple, but this is  the experience of the man's life as much as it is Clinton's, if not much more, the most passionate effort of his life. I take him at his word that the real campaign begins after his crowning, and I think Mrs Clinton has the passion of a turnip. I believe the Trump campaign right now is assembling superchargers, so to speak. Amplification, multiple points of pressure, a protracted struggle for the votes, state by state, rally by rally, precinct by precinct,  everything old is new again ... a serious, professional, winning game.

Maybe I had that hat on too tightly. But. I am just sayin' ... Be Ye Not Disheartened.   The match itself is not 'rigged.'  You get to have your ball counted. 

Quote

And reversing the corruption in the DOJ that Obama and Holder created?  Good luck with that.

I take Mr Trump at his word.   At the very least a political corpse could be re-killed once or twice more.  Fundamentally, he gets to fire everybody and then fill  slots with people whose two givens are to serve the constitution and his will. Consider the future presidential library. We may not know just what is on his agenda Day One. He says it merits looking into. Maybe that was just oats. 

So, all things being equal, there could be the American version of a Royal Commission, which would finally inter the Clintons within the spars of their bingo foundation. And their little dog too.

Seriously, if Trump Campaign can't fuel the fires of outrage born today -- for at least a solid month, I will be sore surprised.  Cue music. Cue the sound of a sucking chest wound.

Speaking of wounds, which President sat on which lap today, taking over Meat space on the Shows from the Outrage?  Who pretended that nothing happened today?  

Edited July 5, 2016 by william.scherk
Removed some shrubbery, of of

[SteveWolfer]

 

8 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

reversing the corruption in the DOJ

Any president that seriously wants to do what Trump says he wants to do, and wants to weed out corruption in the many corrupt agencies,  will need to get the Civil Service Act reformed again (along with other statutes).  And break some unions.  He needs to be able to fire people.  If he can't.... it will be like trying to make a clean sweep of a very dirty stable.... with a small toothbrush.

[BaalChatzaf]

1 hour ago, SteveWolfer said:

She has already done plenty.... more than enough to be impeached on.  The moral case for impeachment is simple; she shouldn't be president because of the many crimes she has committed and lies she has made. 

Impeachment is like an indictment if successful.  Whether it is successful or not, it is a public investigation that has more teeth than an oversight committee hearing can exercise.  If they get the impeachment, then the Senate take that indictment and tries to convict.  I agree that the Senate never would.   Too bad.  Bill and Hillary could have matching Tee-shirts: "I went to Washington and all got was impeached".  She could be the first woman impeached.  Maybe the house could play dirty politics and give her a backroom agreement not to start any impeachment hearings her on past crimes if she only nominates Supreme Court justices from that list of Trumps.

what has she done while being President????

The impeachment/removal process is to be applied to Presidents who have committed what Congress deems to be  high crimes and misdemeanors. 

So far Hillary is as innocent as you are I.  She has not been indicted for felony or misdemeanor nor has she been convicted.  No indictment, no crime.  In a properly conducted trial the judgement of innocence or guilt  is much more objectively reached than when we apply moral judgments.   In a trial we are guided by who/what/when/where/why.  In moral judgement we are guided by approval or disapproval. 

Now if Hillary is elected (a very likely outcome) and she mismanages critical information and data then there is a basis for impeachment and possibly removal.

PS. There is no "moral case".  Only legal cases matter.  Morality is opinion.  Guilt or innocence of an indicted offense is evidence based and established during a trial.  

[SteveWolfer]

1 minute ago, BaalChatzaf said:

what has she done while being President????

The impeachment/removal process is to be applied to Presidents

You are absolutely correct.  The House should wait till she has been in office for a few days.... it probably wouldn't take longer than that for her to violate some law.  But this is really a technicality.  Impeachment is an indictment to remove someone who shouldn't be in office.  She shouldn't be in office.

[BaalChatzaf]

4 minutes ago, SteveWolfer said:

You are absolutely correct.  The House should wait till she has been in office for a few days.... it probably wouldn't take longer than that for her to violate some law.  But this is really a technicality.  Impeachment is an indictment to remove someone who shouldn't be in office.  She shouldn't be in office.

Technicality is what keeps of from being put in a dungeon on a whim.  If enough people think she should be in office, she will be in office. That is Democracy for you.  As Winston Churchill pointed out Democracy is the worst form of government  --- except for all the others.

[SteveWolfer]

26 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

That is Democracy for you.  As Winston Churchill pointed out Democracy is the worst form of government  --- except for all the others.

 

We are not a democracy, but rather a republic.  (Important technicality!)

 

But to do an impeachment is, to a degree, a repudiation of the votes that put the person in office (unless there is a significant change in popularity or significant new information).  The founding fathers didn't like unlimited democracy - they didn't trust that the people would not be swayed by a demagogue or caught up in strong emotions.  They hoped that the electoral system might be a check on that and that if each congressional district would elect a person of above average intelligence and character and therefore the results would be better than with a more unlimited democracy.

--------------------

 

The impeachment process is not criminal in nature.  It is political.

 

The wording is “treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.”   George Mason wanted to include the charge of "maladministration" and Madison agreed with the concept, but thought the word "maladministration" was too vague. 

 

Madison, author of the constitution, said that the impeachment process was needed for political reasons, and that an election every four years was not enough of a check and that "corruption... might be fatal to the republic" if the president could not be removed until the next election. 

 

Notice that Hillary is already up to the neck of her pants suits in evidence of bribery (which the founding fathers described as taking money in exchange for political favors - something where she and Bill appear to have set new records - anyone want to rent a night in the Lincoln bedroom.... or get a pardon).

 

In the Federalist, Hamilton said, “...those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

 

[SteveWolfer]

Last Sunday, the New York Times printed this: "Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say she may decide to retain Ms. Lynch, the nation's first black woman to be attorney general, who took office in April 2015."

Gee, was that the quid pro quo for rigging the game?  Did Loretta tell Bill, "Okay, I'll give you all the answers Hillary needs to give Comey to ensure she gets no indictment, but she has to publically announce...."  And Trump thinks he knows how to make deals.

Combine high levels of partisanship with a secretive, corrupt environment and what do you get?  Conspiracy theories - how could it not happen. 

[turkeyfoot]

4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Geoff,

Do you really think Trump's campaign skills are limited to a single fortuitous event where he pins all his hopes?

He's just taking advantage of the moment by bashing this FBI decision (and Clinton by extension).

Michael

 

4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Geoff,

Do you really think Trump's campaign skills are limited to a single fortuitous event where he pins all his hopes?

He's just taking advantage of the moment by bashing this FBI decision (and Clinton by extension).

Michael

No, of course that would be absurd. Texts Ive received from DT since 6-23 mention only HC except for those strictly asking for donations. A large part of his time is spent being loose with "facts". The fact is, unfortunately she isnt a criminal, not by the definition the FBI is using. Show me hes ready for prime time. The way to go after HC is to go after her beliefs, her record and the system that brings her to the doors of the WH. Hes labeled her behavior ad nauseum, its time to move on to salient points of fundamental difference. 

The choice this year is one of evil or a crude ridiculously vulgar loud mouth braggart who spouts tenuous "facts" and Gary Johnson. I had hoped Trump would rise to the occasion, he seems to be in cruise control, but I am disappointed in his one dimensional character, his policies and his progress. Hes showing signs of fatigue and at near 70, theres no surprise in that. Its doubtful whether he could change his method of operation, though Im listening.

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, turkeyfoot said:

Show me hes ready for prime time.

Geoff,

If running over 500 profitable companies on the open market will not convince you, I doubt there is anything I can say.

 

Seriously. Trump does more than sing and dance, but I'll give you one thing. He doesn't sing the tunes some people want to hear and he's a pretty lousy dancer. He just builds things, fixes things, makes peace among hostile folks (in the reality of projects, not during a campaign) and gets people to follow him.

But, it's true, he's a lousy dancer to the tunes of others.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

23 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Geoff,

If running over 500 profitable companies on the open market will not convince you, I doubt there is anything I can say.

 

Seriously. Trump does more than sing and dance, but I'll give you one thing. He doesn't sing the tunes some people want to hear and he's a pretty lousy dancer. He just builds things, fixes things, makes peace among hostile folks (in the reality of projects, not during a campaign) and gets people to follow him.

But, it's true, he's a lousy dancer to the tunes of others.

Michael

Being successful at business has no necessary connection to being successful at governance.....  The Nation is not a business firm. It is a Republic.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

49 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Being successful at business has no necessary connection to being successful at governance

Bob,

I suspect it has a great connection when the businessman knows how to buy politicians because he's done it often to get them out of his way--and not just in America.

 

Anyway, look at the alternatives. Do you prefer community organizers, career politicians, heirs to crony corporatists, etc.? That's what our republic has been running on. How's that working out for ya'?

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

It's actually kinda cool the way the way Trump did this:

Michael

[turkeyfoot]

Youre right. In a way Trump has to start all over again (since the primaries and apart from his businesses) proving himself in another field of expertise. Whatever attributes he might bring with him may or may not hold him in good stead.  

I recall my father in law, talking about candidates arriving in their plebe year, all well qualified in their own right, many having prepared for years for the undertaking, being told, look to your right and look to your left because only one of you will remain when its over. I have been involved in work where there was a premium on technical competence. But in the end because the job called for rotating crews in 24/7 work, I found after 1 1/2 yrs I wasnt cut out for it. In martial arts, the reasons I wasnt black belt material had little to do with competence in self defense, but that I had no interest in teaching which was the expected payback for a higher belt. 

Some part of Trump is telling himself, over and above simple qualifications, hes got what it takes and wants the position. He has yet to convince me. In the time left before the elections he will answer those questions for himself.  

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's President Obama stuttering his support for Clinton.

Obama needs to NOT think about Trump when he's off the Teleprompter. It blows his diction to hell and back.

Notice that the only time he stutters is when he's riffing off the top of his head about Trump, especially on the word "even" in this case.

Michael

[SteveWolfer]

Hillary Clinton does nothing without the advice of counsel.  She is a lawyer.  Her husband is a lawyer (although disbarred for while), she had her lawyers do the deleting of her 'personal' emails, her chief of staff, Mills, is a lawyer.  She can't turn around without bumping into lawyers.  I mention this because Comey says there was no intent to violate any of the security laws (which actually don't require intent, only gross negligence).  But if shown that only a complete fool would think that Clinton didn't act with complete knowledge of the law, having been fully briefed on the law, being a lawyer, having been surrounded by lawyers, then engaged in the illegal acts any way - for years.... that person should be considered to have knowingly violated the law.  Mens rea and actus reus.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Steve,

Well, the next time I get a speeding ticket, I'll patiently explain to the cop that I was distracted and had no intention of speeding. So he should follow the lead of the FBI and let it go since there is no real reason to give me a ticket.

 

Anyway, the following video is for everybody. Go on. Give it a go. It's there just waiting for you. Nobody will know and you know you want some.

 

Michael

[KorbenDallas]

42 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Here's President Obama stuttering his support for Clinton.

Obama needs to NOT think about Trump when he's off the Teleprompter. It blows his diction to hell and back.

Notice that the only time he stutters is when he's riffing off the top of his head about Trump, especially on the word "even" in this case.

Michael

Saw this mentioned on Drudge, Obama is standing behind this podium with the Presidential seal on it, and allowed Hillary to speak from it.

Edited July 6, 2016 by KorbenDallas
t..t..t..tsk, tsk, Mr. President.

[KorbenDallas]

Paul Ryan still has some Randian blood in him for Justice:

Ryan: GOP will hold hearings on Clinton probe
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ryan-gop-will-hold-hearings-on-clinton-probe/ar-AAi8X6b?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Quote

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Tuesday evening that Republicans will hold hearings to learn more about the FBI's decision to not recommend criminal charges for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

"People have been convicted for far less," Ryan said during an interview with Megyn Kelly on Fox News's "The Kelly File," saying that he thought FBI director James Comey "was going to recommend prosecution" based on the FBI director's opening remarks in a press conference Tuesday.

Ryan said the FBI's decision not to recommend charges "underscores the belief that the Clintons live above the law."

Comey said that while there was evidence Clinton and her staff was "extremely careless" with classified information, "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring a case against her.

"We're going to have hearings," Ryan said on Fox [...]

 

Edited July 6, 2016 by KorbenDallas
...and justice for _all_?

[SteveWolfer]

I certainly agree with that statement (in the Alex Jones video) that we have demarcation - i.e., below some sort of line you are just one of the little people and the laws apply to you.  Above that line and you are exempt. 

All tyrannies are divided into the rulers and the ruled - the process of going from where we are to there has to look like this.

I think Roger Stone may be overly confident of Trump's debating ability.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's Cenk Uygur, a Bernie progressive, doing Trump's work on the details. And doing it with surgical precision and efficacy. There's no rebutting this.

(Cenk says he can't stand Trump, but if this is the way he can't stand Trump, I hope he really really really can't stand Trump in the future.  )

Michael

[KorbenDallas]

6 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Seriously, if Trump Campaign can't fuel the fires of outrage born today -- for at least a solid month, I will be sore surprised.  Cue music. Cue the sound of a sucking chest wound.

Speaking of wounds, which President sat on which lap today, taking over Meat space on the Shows from the Outrage?  Who pretended that nothing happened today?  

I'm guessing a direct contribution to Moveon.org would be a bit obvious for Mr. 44th President--instead, government plane rides!
 

[BaalChatzaf]

5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Bob,

I suspect it has a great connection when the businessman knows how to buy politicians because he's done it often to get them out of his way--and not just in America.

 

Anyway, look at the alternatives. Do you prefer community organizers, career politicians, heirs to crony corporatists, etc.? That's what our republic has been running on. How's that working out for ya'?

 

Michael

If it were Elon Musk  running for President I would not hesitate to favor him.  But Trump is (1) crude  (2)  apparently ignorant of Constitutional limitations (3) has a distorted view.  For him life is a game of Let's Make a Deal  (4) Intellectually shallow  (5)  short sighted in a dangerous way.  

Hillary is probably worse, so you are asking me who do I consider the lesser evil.  I am no longer in the business of choosing the lesser evil.  Let others do it. I will not dirty either my hands  or my  essential being playing such games.  The U.S. that the Founders risk their lives to bring into being is dead and gone.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

4 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

I am no longer in the business of choosing the lesser evil.

Michael

Yet you would vote for Elon Musk, the crony of cronies? The insider of insiders? The Great Pretender?

That guy doesn't exist without government funding that he then calls capitalism. I don't think he could build a Tinker Toy car without a government paycheck.

Gimmee a break!

You seem to be intent on choosing outright evil over all others.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I have a question.

Now that Clinton was let off for running government business on a series of private servers, does this mean Donald Trump can set up his own private servers for government business, too?

 

Michael