July 5th, 2016...The US is now officially a third world nation, politically.

[mak2]

Well, I am beginning to agree with this. There were, in fact, 110 classified documents on Hillary's personal server. This is the first time I heard that for a fact. If I had left a single classified document on my desk unsecured (we didn't have email back then, still pony express) it would have cost me a stripe. I have seen that happen. The POTUS should have better judgment than an enlisted 20 year old. Guess not. Now lets see if the Repubs can do anything with this.

They found enough to indict, they chose not to indict. Don't EVER forget that. Lynch had her hand up Comey's ass operating his mouth.

 

[American]

Well, I am beginning to agree with this. There were, in fact, 110 classified documents on Hillary's personal server. This is the first time I heard that for a fact. If I had left a single classified document on my desk unsecured (we didn't have email back then, still pony express) it would have cost me a stripe. I have seen that happen. The POTUS should have better judgment than an enlisted 20 year old. Guess not. Now lets see if the Repubs can do anything with this.

That's right, you're a Marine. I'd have been disappointed, if you'd have answered any other way. It's the first time you believed it, because it came from the Director of the FBI. We have saying this, and I have REALLY been saying it for months and months.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

What in the world does that link have to do with the belief that we will have some UN intervention in the near future? It doesn't support that at all. The worst traits shown there are greedy, intolerant (and the NSA spying is the main reason for that low score according to the link), arrogance, and violent (likely due to our crime rate and history on intervening).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Notice I said may. And I disagree with your Part II, vehemently.

 

[roguenuke]

Notice I said may. And I disagree with your Part II, vehemently.

"Part II"?

And I was commenting on you not posting a link, or anything else for that matter, that supports a UN intervention led by any country against us is likely in the near future at all. That link shows us with relatively good favor ability in the world. Russia and China likely have less favorability than us, so how could they lead any first world nations against us based on our current favorability level?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Glen Contrarian]

...so then, this is all the Republicans fault then, right?

No Democrats were responsible for anything I mentioned...correct?

Is that what you just said?

I read it as..." because the GOP were corrupt in some things, what went down today was just fine and should be excused ".

'Scuse you, but in your OP, you said, "Our honor died today." I simply pointed out to you that the GOP's done FAR worse on several occasions...but you're somehow of the opinion that when it came to something quite a bit LESS serious than what the GOP did, well, "our honor died today."

But I get it - since it involved Hillary and Obama, well, THAT means the country just went to hell in a handbasket, whereas we somehow were still honorable after Ford pardoning Nixon "for all crimes he MAY have committed" (caps mine); we were still somehow honorable as we sold missiles to Iran - freaking IRAN! - to fund a secret war; we were still somehow honorable torturing people (two of whom were tortured more than a hundred times) in Iraq...

Yeah, we were still somehow honorable after all that...but when it comes to Hillary screwing up with her e-mail, well, ha-RUMPH! "Our honor died today!!!!!!!!"

In other words, you've got a galloping case of double standards there. I suggest you (and the rest of the right-wingers here) start viewing the Right with the same doggone level of cynicism as you do the Left. Of course, you'd better be careful when you do...'cause that's what drove me from the Right to the Left to begin with....

 

[mak2]

it just pushed be away from both parties. I think you should handle politics like religion. Stop and think about it and do what you think is right, not what the party or the church thinks is right. It is much more difficult to have to think about stuff, but it makes me feel better about things. The double standard from the right is amazing.

'Scuse you, but in your OP, you said, "Our honor died today." I simply pointed out to you that the GOP's done FAR worse on several occasions...but you're somehow of the opinion that when it came to something quite a bit LESS serious than what the GOP did, well, "our honor died today."

But I get it - since it involved Hillary and Obama, well, THAT means the country just went to hell in a handbasket, whereas we somehow were still honorable after Ford pardoning Nixon "for all crimes he MAY have committed" (caps mine); we were still somehow honorable as we sold missiles to Iran - freaking IRAN! - to fund a secret war; we were still somehow honorable torturing people (two of whom were tortured more than a hundred times) in Iraq...

Yeah, we were still somehow honorable after all that...but when it comes to Hillary screwing up with her e-mail, well, ha-RUMPH! "Our honor died today!!!!!!!!"

In other words, you've got a galloping case of double standards there. I suggest you (and the rest of the right-wingers here) start viewing the Right with the same doggone level of cynicism as you do the Left. Of course, you'd better be careful when you do...'cause that's what drove me from the Right to the Left to begin with....

 

[Glen Contrarian]

it just pushed be away from both parties. I think you should handle politics like religion. Stop and think about it and do what you think is right, not what the party or the church thinks is right. It is much more difficult to have to think about stuff, but it makes me feel better about things. The double standard from the right is amazing.

I think you'll find that most people - on the left or the right - are not lemmings. Yeah, I enthusiastically support Hillary...but that doesn't mean I agree with her or the DNC on everything - I certainly don't! For instance, I'm all for nuclear power - for electricity and for ICBM's. I'm for TPP...which is a pretty unpopular thing these days, but if we let that go, China will step right in with their plan for a Pacific trade zone, which means they - and not we - would be setting the agenda.

So don't think that people are lemmings - we're not.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

And I was commenting on you not posting a link, or anything else for that matter, that supports a UN intervention led by any country against us is likely in the near future at all. That link shows us with relatively good favor ability in the world. Russia and China likely have less favorability than us, so how could they lead any first world nations against us based on our current favorability level?

There is a difference between saying something "may happen" and that it will "definitely happen"...

 

[roguenuke]

There is a difference between saying something "may happen" and that it will "definitely happen"...

Yes there is. But I could easily say "the US may one day take over the world", but without any sort of evidence that we are looking to go in that direction, I would expect people to dismiss such a statement as completely irrelevant or nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RetiredNSmilin]

But it doesn't make since because if we've always had at least as much corruption throughout places in our government then why is this single event enough to turn your feelings to believing politically we are equivalent to a third world government? A single event that when looked at next to so many others in our past even recent past, is almost benign. Heck it probably would have handed the Presidency over to the Republican Party had they actually nominated someone who wasn't a walking douchebag. I think the fact that if someone really seriously ran as a moderate third party this election they'd have a very good chance of being President, more than even Perot in '92 before he quit the first time, shows that we actually aren't nearly as corrupt as many want to believe.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The main difference this time is the fact they were so above board about it, and made no bones about how they knew the fix was in.

In a matter of days, all markers were called in, and every subordinate was reminded of their place, and all did what they were told to do.

And it was all done out in the open, and shamelessly so.

That is the major difference.

Before, scandals were broken on us as a bit of a surprise, or there was at least the APPEARANCE of trying to be within the law.

Not this time.

 

[RetiredNSmilin]

Lighten up Francis.

so MODERATOR status gives you the right to bait, attack, and insult....and keep on insulting, baiting, and attacking when asked to stop.

Is that how it works?

oh, wait, you already self described yourself as an asshole in a previous post.

It is not necessary to prove it each and every time you make a post.

Your point is well understood by all.

 

[eohrnberger]

Naturally, the opposite is true. There is absolutely no evidence that Obama had any contact with Lynch during the entire FBI investigation....or that Lynch had any contact with Comey. None.

I'm sorry but that's not believable. Lynch is, after all, Obama's AG, a cabinet post.
You are trying have us believe that Obama and Lynch never had meetings they both attended?

 

[Threegoofs]

This entire thread reads like a three year old having a tantrum because he didn't get what he wanted.

 

[Moot]

I'm sorry but that's not believable. Lynch is, after all, Obama's AG, a cabinet post.
You are trying have us believe that Obama and Lynch never had meetings they both attended?

If you have proof they both met and/or discussed the case...then post it.

 

[eohrnberger]

If you have proof they both met and/or discussed the case...then post it.

Didn't you previously state that Lynch and Obama never met?
I was pointing out that they must have met, she is his AG after all, a cabinet post. So clearly, they met, and I would imagine quite a bit.

Given that no records, or perhaps limited records, exist and are published from these meetings, I seriously doubt that anyone other than the principals really know what they discussed. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. All one could honestly and accurately say is that at this time, it's not known one way or the other.

 

[EvaPeron]

I think no longer being proud of your country is a bit of an overreaction to the FBI not finding enough evidence to indict Hillary. Has it ever occurred to you the RW propaganda might be just that, and there really isn't enough evidence of wrongdoing?

For the people who think there really isn't evidence - I wish they could say what it would take to convince them of wrong doing. It seems to appear to most Americans that this was a travesty of justice. Does it not bother you that Bill Clinton who has his own history of lying in the white house (to say the least) met with LL on the airplane? Wouldn't you say that was a conflict of interest? And, isn't it weird that just a few days later (this email scandal has been going for a very long time) but just four days later, Hillary volunteers to be interviewed by the FBI? And, just three days after that (by the way, how weird do you find it that they did this on a Saturday (the start to the fourth of July holiday weekend) but three days after that Comey comes out with a very negative statement clarifying all the things she did do wrong all which are specifically said to be in violation of the oath that she took when holding office and yet he sadly says they will not bring up charges against her?

This is not about right and left it is about justice.