Saturday, August 15, 2015

Who is more to blame?
HILLARY for dissembling, or
The FBI for failing to charge in and seize
the damnable device the moment it's existence became known before damning evidence could be removed?


UPDATE: Headlines from Lucianne.com

 

Obviously, Hillary doesn't understand the concept of "due diligence" 
when seeking out a secret email account.



There a terrific techie thread running here.Check it out.

 

Servergate is probably the most interesting political story of our time. 
Forgive us while we over-cover.

 

Woodstock Anniversary Wind Up: 
When Max Yasgur went out to clean up his cornfield 
he found Bernie Sanders. Bernie's brain is still there.

 

Hillary, this is what a "vast right wing conspiracy" looks like. Choosing life over loss of government revenue.

 

The ugly truth is coming out and now it's up to Congress to stop
 0bama's faux nuclear deal with Iran.

 

Washington Post uses Carly Fiorina quote as primer lesson
 on "journalism ethics." Stop laughing. It really confuses 
their journalistic integrity.

106 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. JMJ,
      Obviously, something that she wanted to keep hidden. Maybe more than one something.

      Delete
    2. If she had nothing to hide, why did she first deny that she had anything at all on her private server, but has since been forced to reveal evidence that secret government files may have sat UNSECURED in her email. If she were honest and had nothing to hide, she would have offered to turn her server' over to the FBI voluntarily as soon as questions arose abut its legality. Instead, she has played the usual game of trying to stonewall an investigation first by pretending there's nothing TO investigate claiming purely political motives in the part of "the vast right wing conspiracy." ;-) These typical Clintonian tactics have enabled her to jettison most-if-not-all evidence that MIGHT be used against her. Yesterday, she turned over a machine "professionally wiped clean."

      If these are not the actions of a guilty person trying either to hide or DESTROY evidence, I'll eat a concrete block for dinner.

      Delete
    3. ALSO, Jersey, many have said it is ILLEGAL for a government official to use PRIVATE emails to conduct official business, so for that ALONE she should be subjected to a criminal investigation.

      Delete
    4. Jersey has zero credibility on this topic.

      He's hopelessly high on Hillary's fumes and nothing can bring him down.

      Delete
    5. Funny! Jersey never struck me as the type who'd get high on the smell of rotten fish. (:-o

      Delete
    6. Jersey is an interesting specimen.

      Delete
    7. When they present a case against her, then I'll care about this. Otherwise I really just don't care. I figured she just wanted to have control of her correspondence so it wouldn't get parsed by the right wing. I can understand her paranoia. The insipid right has been out to destroy her and her husband from the beginning, and for nothing more than ideological claptrap. I find any strong feelings for the Clinton's, pro or con, to be just plain stupid.

      JMJ

      Delete
    8. Yeah... the federal government is infested with sneaky rightwingers...

      *eye roll*

      Delete
    9. stomp, snort, and gruntAugust 15, 2015 at 2:04 PM

      Shades of the Watergate cover-up.

      Delete
    10. So, Hillary had party funded criminals breaking into Republican campaign offices and hid the information on her server!

      The morons.

      JMJ

      Delete
    11. See there? Jersey's loony, he's huffing the fumes.

      Classified information found on her server. She wiped it clean. Nixonian.

      Delete
    12. "Classified information found on her server. She wiped it clean."

      You're retarded.

      JMJ

      Delete
    13. Typical of politicians in general since time immemorial, Jack. Nixon was a good president. He was the victim ofVENDETTA in the form of a journalistic coup d'etat engineered by a virulent. de facto LEFT WING conspiracy.

      I resent seeing Mr. Nixon denigrated on these pages by using him as a horrible example. Mr. Nixon was a ViCTIM not a VILLAIN.

      Delete
    14. Jersey, the quality of your commentary has degenerated badly. You know you HAVE no legitimate defense of Madam Clinton's conduct to offer, so you resort to to DENIAL and bullying INSULTS instead. Such tactics don't work here, so please stop using them.

      Mrs. Clinton's conduct regarding her precious server is INDEFENSIBLE. That does not mean she won't survive it, as she and her consort in crime and deception have done so may times before. the deliberately "dumbed down" American public is so weak both morally and intellectually they will swallow anything served up by Their Masters in the Enemedia with relish and gusto.

      I know you do have intelligence. My fondest wish for you is that you begin to use it and start to THINK for YOURSELF.

      Delete
    15. FT: You give Jersey way too much credit. The quality of his commentary has rarely risen above toilet stall doggerel or Democrap Underground red propaganda.

      He is no better than those of the fringe right who do the same thing.

      Jersey: Do you read the news? She had a clandestine server. Not illegal, just sleazy and sneaky, a typical Clintonian maneuver. Some of the e-mails they pulled off of it contained classified information, which requires (let me use your vernacula) F*cking REQUIRES!!! a government investigation.

      The sissy-girl Rethuglican GOOPers in congress didn't point all this out; Obama's Inspector General for Intelligence programs did.

      The GOOPers in congress are not conducting this investigation; Obama's FBI is.

      I doubt anything will come of it, We are an oligarchy, and the political class always takes care of its own.

      You make yourself look foolish when you cannot even face the facts as presented by the government.

      The rank partisanship and political hero worship you practice is way more dangerous than any religion, and trust me, Jersey, you are practicing an extreme religion with a poisonous orthodoxy. Extremists like you, on BOTH ends, are killing our liberal democracy.

      Delete
    16. SIlver, we're making a dogged attempt to practice the nearly-lost art of diplomacy here in case you hadn't noticed. KNowing the truth is fairly easy for those who open themselves to it, but PERSUADING others to BELIEVE the truth is notoriously difficult. Much more ART than Science, if you catch my drift.

      Delete
    17. I know I won't change sluggo's mind, but someday far away when digital anthropologists are digging through the ruins, I want them to see my ripost to such idiocy chalked up here on the walls...

      Delete
    18. Are you kidding me?August 17, 2015 at 6:58 AM

      Free Thinker

      "SIlver, we're making a dogged attempt to practice the nearly-lost art of diplomacy here in case you hadn't noticed"

      Then hold Jersey McJones to that same standard. He just told Always On Watch to commit suicide. Is saying that diplomatic? No.

      And he's always calling somebody stupid. What a crass bum he is!

      Delete
  2. We are, for believing that the Left could be an honest partner in the practice of Democratic governance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Right isn't perfect in this regard either, Titan. Did you see Rand Paul's ad showing old video clips of The Donald claiming love and kinship with the Clintons, a positive stance on Planned Parenthood and Abortion, championing Single Payer Healthcare, advocating NAFTA, and any number of other issues on which he's completely reversed himself for this current campaign?

      Rand may be dour and abrasive, but he's pretty truthful. I'm willing to ber the farm, however, that he'll never be president.

      I've been amused by Trump's bull-in-a-china-shop approach, and glad like Camille Paglia that he's shaken the political establishment out of its complacent lethargy, but he is NOT going to be our "Savior" anymore than the anemic choices favored by Karl Rove, Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch will do anything to change the revolting status quo in which we're mired.

      Trump currently seems to be fooling too many of the people most of the time, but I don't see that lasting. Already the novelty is wearing off, and the act is getting stale. BUT, as Barnum said ...

      God help us!

      Delete
    2. stomp, snort, and gruntAugust 15, 2015 at 2:34 PM

      Rand is certainly one of the more honest of the lot. As you point out he likely has no shot at the gold ring. Honesty is likely part of the reason.

      People like to her what they want to hear.

      Delete
    3. What I like about the Trump-Sanders insurgency is that it proves just hpw far politics has become an obvious ALL OLIGARCHY, ALL AROUND affair. There's the "honest oligarch" Trump who promises to extend the oligarchy and rule the country directly (cynically, ala Berlusconi), and the FAKE-Sanders Oligarchy, who promises to "symbolically" kill off the oligarchy and replace it with a Politboro of Communist Oligarchs who will rule in the Name of the People whilst secretly enriching themselves. The contrast couldn't be clearer, except for the question as to exactly what the "Establishment" has to fear from either removing the cloak of deception entirely, or so completely that no one will ever dare speak of it again, the answer being that the oligarchy seems to work best when its' presence remains an unanswered question.

      Delete
  3. A FT reader, and Progressive HaterAugust 15, 2015 at 6:50 AM

    Good point FT!
    Kind of makes you think about what the Hell is going on here!

    ReplyDelete
  4. LMAO!!!
    Good Point?
    I think that much like But like Benghazi,Benghazi,Benghazi this will continue to be the raw meat the clown car dangles for the base. But when the time the elections roll around, this will ALL be old and meaningless news.

    But as they say in China! Wats of Wuck!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your mindless partsan boilerplate should be deleted, but I'll let it stay, because it shows what a paucity of intellect you and others like you exhibit.

      You've done nothing more instructive or enlightening than to say "YOU STINK!"

      Are you in seventh or eight grade? Sounds like it.

      Delete
    2. Ming Toy Epstein said

      In China what we leally say is Rots o'f Ruck, you Melican plick.

      Delete
    3. §;-D=

      You very funny lady. Ming Toy.

      Delete
  5. LOL! I'd feel sorry for You people here, and it's hard to imagine that FT is too stupid not to see the irony here.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the back-handed compliment –– I think?

      Delete
  6. Did the FBI find out about the private server in time to prevent its being wiped clean?

    If the FBI found out in time, then the FBI is equally to blame, IMO.

    With all the time that Mr. AOW and I have spent in doctors' waiting rooms this week, I've had some time to think of what possible reasons H. Clinton could have had to use a private server. I will post my hypotheses early Monday morning; I just queued up that blog post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I'm really looking forward to that," said he licking his chops. ;-)

      Delete
    2. FT,
      I'm hoping that my post will generate come thoughtful comments.

      Delete
    3. You know we will do out best to make a worthy contribution or two.

      Delete
  7. Hmm. That is really unfortunate because Hillary Clinton has spoken out forcefully on the subject of police violence against minorities, something that The Righties never do, and they alway seem to waffled on or at least given the appearance of waffling on. And we know that the Republicans have never said anything at all. What the Black lives matter movement can do in the next election is give it to the GOP which will destroy any good thing done for minorities in this country in the last 8 years. Unfortunately for everyone, it could prove to be the equivalent of the Bush/ Cheny administration. Americans need to think and learn from the past. President Obama, and Hillary have been friends of the poor and jobless since this country got rid of Bush and his ilk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My impression of H. Rodham Clinton is that she has no true convictions and little or no genuine concern for anything beyond he advance of her personal power agenda. Her words on all the issues she claims concern her are largely empty and show little passion. Like most politicians she will EXPLOIT issues of genuine concern to make herself look appealing to an audience, but I feel very strongly there's no truth in it. It's all an act.

      Delete
  8. What the hell does that mean? And what does that have to do with the Brooklyn Bridge???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What ARE you talking about, TMIMITW?

      Delete

  9. Refardless Who's MORE to blame? She has NO business being this countries President! She had no business being secretary of state, she should just stick to baking cookies where she can't hurt anyone. She lied and she still lies about it, out of a small sample of 40 emails, 10 percent were classified and two of them highly classified. She will never go to jail cause she's a clinton though , they make up their own rules for themselves .
    If she was POTUS shed get us into a war over night!
    In my opinion, she's a lying heartless bitch !
    This country will be a far better place when she and the rest of her ilk are finally kicked out of American politics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, that's ONE man's opinion, but it's still just bluster. I don't like her either, but we need more solid evidence to back up our condemnation.

      I understand her cookies usually contained a1/4 cup of steel filings and a generous shaking or two of Comet cleanser, moistened with muriatic acid, so I don't think we should encourage her to get back in the kitchen. ;-)

      Delete
  10. NOT only that we shouldn’t elect a person who doesn’t know what a classified document looks like, but having classified information on a personal server is a violation of law.

    And it has nothing to do with her Sex, or Obama, or Obama’'s race. or even the fact that she’s a Democrat, It has to do with her corruption, her lying, and her incompetence. The same things would be said about them if she were a male White, or a Black Conservative

    I hate to inform you, but all criticism of the Democrats on these boards is based on race and party. That is just another dem/liberal/progressive failed talking point, the American people see through your bull.

    Furthermore, the majority of Americans support a criminal investigation of Hillary, and the Democrat power brokers and money people would love to dump her. And we will be seeing that happen sooner than later.
    Just watch and see how suddenly she’s going to quit because of “health” reasons.
    Why else do you see that pompous fool Biden being groomed?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. " ... the American people see through your bull."

      How I wish that were true, Redfish, but it's a dubious claim at best.

      How I know?

      Obama was elected TWICE. If that isn't proof of intellectual deficiency on the part of the electorate, I don't know what would be.

      Delete
  11. A vote for ANY demoncRAT is, essentially, a vote against the principals of this nation, since any vote for a demoncRAT is a vote in support of Obama(THHO) and his policies.

    Think about this the next time you enter the voting booth...: Are you more likely to be beheaded, captured and taken hostage by a lunatic organization, involved in a Race Riot, or a hostage situation over seas, or exposed to a deadly virus now than you were seven years ago?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An extravagant claim. You may be correct, but it would help a lot if you could you back it up with two or three specific examples. Can you?

      Delete
  12. Have NO fears all you Liberal Democrats,and rest assured, you won't have to deal with Hillary, that creep Joe Biden's on the way!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wish I had your confidence, Redfish!

      Delete
  13. Hellary is just the latest example of a gargantuan bipartisan problem: We are no longer a nation of laws. We are a nation of men and women herded, channeled and punished by rules and edicts issued by petty dictators who themselves are above the law.

    Had General Petraeus been a loyal democrat with zero rumblings of presidential ambitions (or if a Repub had been in power) we never would have heard anything about any scandal or mishandling of classified information. That's how things work for the rich and powerful in the USA Today.

    Hillary is an inept, corrupt, batwinged power-craver married to a pedo-rapist, and she colludes with him in their international crime syndicate known as the Clinton Foundation, which they use to launder money, dodge taxes, peddle influence and sell access to the high reaches of the US Government.

    Whose fault is it? It's our fault for putting up with this shit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What should we do –– start a series of torchlight brigades armed with pitchforks to storm the nation's capital?

      Bomb DNC headquarters?

      Suicide bombings at Hillary's stump speeches?

      Nail Rachel Maddow to a cross and burn her alive while dragging her through the streets?

      Jus' askin' ;-)

      Delete
    2. The root of the problem is rank partisanship. We give our own politicians a free pass, no matter how stupid, venal, dirty, or unconstitutional they may be. He's my guy, so I support him no matter what.

      That's what's benefiting Hellary right now. Despite all the baggage and junk in her capacious trunk, she can win, and that's all that matters to the partisans with blood in their eyes.

      Delete
    3. But aren't we Republicans given to criticizing those supposedly on "our" side, and meting out swift often draconian punishment when they are found guilty of wrongdoing of even the most nugatory variety?

      Democrats seem to stick together, circle their wagons and COUNTERATTACK anyone who DARES to criticize one of THEIR people.

      Delete
    4. I do think we throw out our stinkers more readily than the Dems do, but the media plays a part in that, so demonizing and GOOPer who commits the slightest wrong, while giving a pass to all Dems (hasn't Bernie Sanders written about women enjoying rape fantasies?)

      Think back to the Bush-Cheney march to war in Iraq. Very few conservatives held their arguments to any scrutiny. We blindly followed.

      I could go on, but I don't enjoy giving leftwingers any ammo.

      Delete
    5. Any number of people 'we' threw out were NOT stinkers –– Nixon, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, and several others whose names escape me right now.

      RINOS are CAVERS pure and simple, and hat is why I detest them even MORE than I despise D'Rats.

      Delete
  14. Foot in mouth again.August 15, 2015 at 11:04 AM

    Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joked about the ongoing investigation over her use of a private email server while at the State Department, telling a group of Iowa Democrats that the hubbub is just “politics.”


    At least SHE thinks it's funny!
    No one else does.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it is funny. The rabid, psychotic, utterly misplaced and stupid hatred of Hillary Clinton is purely a creation of a right wing that simply doesn't care about this country, the people, or the politics. All that matters to those morons is ideology, stupid, backwards, bigoted, selfish ideology.

      JMJ

      Delete
    2. I think the widespread contempt for and distrust of Madam Clinton has been generated by HILLARY CLINTON, HERSELF, and no one else, Jersey. She has a miserable, abrasive personality, she looks like a bloated old bag whose dresses come off the rack at Walmart, her voice is a harsh, grating twang that closely resembles Margaret Hamilton's stellar performance as the Wicked Witch of the West –– the classic nasty character all America has loved to hate since 1939. Not only that she has proved herself to be greedy, scheming, ruthless and motivated primarily by a personal lust for POWER.

      Now if you could find ONE thing NICE to say about her other than "she stood by her man," I'd love to hear about it.

      Delete
    3. Oh, and I forgot to add: In addition to her unattractive qualities listed above HRC is a compulsive, apparently congenital LIAR. It's as though the Truth very simply was not IN her.

      Delete
    4. "I think the widespread contempt for and distrust of Madam Clinton has been generated by HILLARY CLINTON, HERSELF"

      MY ASS. IMHO, ONLY a moron would have such a strong opinion of Clinton pro OR con. This nonsense was ginned up by interests and people like you are their useful idiots. Delusional, bogeyman, bullshit.

      JMJ

      Delete
  15. Jersey,
    Pull your head out. IF this is an attack on Hellary, it is coming from the left, not the right.

    When you run an international crime syndicate that rakes in hundreds of millions a year, you're bound to make a few enemies...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a just plain ridiculously silly thing to say.

      JMJ

      Delete
  16. Republican Candidate, Dr. Ben Carson, has just obliterated liberal claims that Planned Parenthood helps black women.

    TRUTH: Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger to abort black babies and “control that population.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a SIMPLISTIC statement, Hans –– a tactic typical of the left, who virtually invented the practice of LYING with FACTS.

      There was a great deal more to Margaret Sanger than that. I –– along with most civilized people –– a staunch advocate of birth control for many and varied reasons. ALL good things may be abused and used for evil purposes. FIRE, of course, is the first and always the handiest example of that.

      "There's nothing either good or bad but THINKING makes it so."

      ~ Shakespeare

      Delete
    2. By his logic Volkswagons are little Hitlermobiles.

      JMJ

      Delete
    3. FT,
      I myself am a staunch advocate of birth control, but not for some of the reasons which Margaret Sanger stated.

      BTW, Milton Friedman credited the limiting of family size with the rise of the middle class because one generation's wealth could pass more intact if family size were limited. I read the information in Capitalism and Freedom.

      Delete
  17. CARSON: Maybe I am not objective when it comes to Planned Parenthood, but, you know, I know who Margaret Sanger is, and I know that she believed in eugenics, and one of the reasons you find most of their clinics in black neighborhoods is so that you can find a way to control that population. I think people should go back and read about Margaret Sanger who founded this place — a woman Hillary Clinton by the way says that she admires. Look and see what many people in Nazi Germany said about her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That assertion has been disputed by the Left, Hans. I do not now whether it's true or not.

      "THEY" claim that Dr. Carson didn't know what he he was talking about.

      So we're left with the old business of "How do you prove a negative?"

      We'd have to COUNT all the PP Clinics in the USA, and then determine what percentage are located in Black Ghettos. Are you up to that challenge? I, thank God, am not a statistician, but I'd be interested to know the truth, wouldn't you?

      Meanwhile, I doubt if Dr. Carson was guilty of "lying" when he said that. Unfortunately, the Left always brings out The Long Knives willingly wielded by their handmaidens and knights errant otherwise known as The ENEMEDIA every time a credible opponent to their TYRANNIST agenda surfaces and begins to attract a following.

      Delete
    2. For what it's worth...

      1933: NAZI PARTY AND FOUNDERS OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD JOIN HANDS



      The founders of Planned Parenthood had more ties to Hitler than just a shared vision. Their board of directors included avowed Nazi supporters like Dr. Lothrop Stoddard (who authored The Rising Tide of Color Against White Supremacy and another praising the Nazi sterilization law). They used their official publication to spread Nazi propaganda. In April of 1933, Birth Control Review published an article by Dr. Ernst Rubin, who was Hitler's director of genetic sterilization and a founder of the Nazi Society for Racial Hygiene. In this article Dr. Rubin wrote:


      "The danger to the community of the unsegregated feeble-minded woman is more evident. Most dangerous are the middle and high grades living at large who, despite the fact that their defect is not easily recognizable, should nevertheless be prevented from procreation. . . In my view we should act without delay."

      Prof. Dr. Ernst Rudin, head of Nazi Germany's eugenics program.
      "Eugenics Sterlization: An Urgent Need." - Birth Control Review,
      Volume XVII, Number 4 (April 1933), pp. 102-4.



      Both Sanger and the Nazi Rudin believe it was imperative that the "middle and high grades" also be "prevented from procreation." Compare Dr. Rudin's quote to this one from Sanger:


      ". . .there is sufficient evidence to lead us to believe that the so-called 'borderline cases' are a greater menace than the out-and-out "defective delinquents" who can be supervised, controlled and prevented from procreating their kind."

      Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization.
      Brentano's Press, NY, 1922, p. 91


      (continued below)

      Delete
    3. (continued from above)

      The founders of Planned Parenthood printed Dr. Rudin's article in the same year that he worked with SS chief Heinrich Himmler to draw up German's 1933 sterilization law which called for the sterlization of all Jews and "colored" German children. The Nazi sterlization law bears a shocking resemblance to Margaret Sanger's own "Plan for Peace." printed in the April 1932 issue of "Birth Control Review."


      CONCENTRATION CAMPS: SANGER'S "PLAN FOR PEACE"



      Sanger's plan called for the formation of American concentration camps to "corral" that "enormous part of our population" with "hereditary taints":


      "To apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted. . . to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives. . ."

      Mararet Sanger. "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review
      Volumn XVI, Number 4 (April 1932), pp. 107-8.



      What percentage of the population would Margaret Sanger wish to segregate? After citing army statistics she noted:


      ". . .nearly half - 47.3 per cent - of the population had the mentality of twelve-year-old children or less - in other words that they are morons."

      Mararet Sanger. The Pivot of Civilazation.
      Brentano's Press, NY, 1922, p. 263



      She went on to say that "only 13,500.00 [or 13.5% of the 100 million U.S. population of the time] will ever show superior intelligence" ibid. p. 264. These must be her "thoroghbreds." the ones who are not "tainted." Remember that she considered "borderline cases" the most dangerous. Thus, for Sanger, 86.5% of the population would be "morons" or "borderline cases" and prevented from procreation! Not even Hitler went this far.


      For the 47.3% who "are morons" she suggested:


      "The emergency problem of segregation and sterlization must be faced immediately. Every feeble-monded girl or woman of the hereditary type, especially of the moron class, should be segregated during the reproductive period. . . we prefer the policy of immediate sterilzation, of making sure that parenthood is absolutely prohibited to the feeble-minded."


      More at the above link.

      Delete
    4. Certainly sounds as though she was a desperately unattractive person, AOW, but there HAS to be a LOT more to it than that. Character assassination via Selected Facts has been developed into a fine art by evil geniuses in the 20th century, although I'm sure it's a tactic as old as organized tribal societies.

      It's rarely-if-ever mentioned, but I think it's signifiant to note that Margaret Sanger was n ethnic Jew. So MANY of those people were in the vanguard of the "movements" that avidly sought to turn Western Christian Civilization ass over kettle –– and look at the tragic SUCCESS they've enjoyed.

      The tremendous irony is that Sanger is routinely vilified for being an ANTI-SEMITE, and here she was, herself, a JEWESS.

      I don't use terms like "evil genius" for naught.

      And then there's the little matter of George Bernard Shaw and all the dreadful things HE said –– some of them on FILM ––, but Shaw's literary prowess is such that NOTHING could deter me from admiring the marvellous work he produced.

      True genius in my system of values should be held above criticism.

      Too much fault-finding–– a salient characteristic of the Left –– betrays a petty spirit.

      Delete
    5. FT,
      Yes, Sanger was an ethnic Jew. So, why would aJew condone the murder of other Jews? If she did indeed do so.

      Sometimes, ethnic logic doesn't apply. For example:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_Aryan

      Delete
    6. Anyone who thinks Planned Parenthood represents eugenics and Nazism is so stupid they should just shoot themselves immediately.

      JMJ

      Delete
    7. JMJ,
      I did not say that Planned Parenthood represents eugenics and Nazism.

      I do assert that Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist and that her stance on eugenics had common ground with Hitler's social philosophy.

      I will not be shooting myself immediately. But, clearly, your comment indicates that you want people who disagree with you to drop dead.

      You have once again indicated just how intolerant those on the Left are.

      Delete
  18. A certainty: Hillary will not graciously step aside. See:

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/15/email-setbacks-bernie-sanders-but-hillary-clinton-still-favorite

    ReplyDelete
  19. Fred Beard's GhostAugust 15, 2015 at 3:32 PM

    My favorite comment on a Hillary story at the WaPo:


    Lance Strong
    1:22 PM MDT
    Hitlary was so upset she chewed huma out

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Before or after Huma tongue shampoo'd Hillary's carpet?

      Delete
    2. Keep it clean, Stanley –– please.

      Delete
  20. Reverend Al ShartstainAugust 15, 2015 at 3:47 PM

    Hillary Rodman Clinton is clean. I can guarantee you that. She would make a way better president than any of those old white fools in the Republikkkan party!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah yes, the party of Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, and Ben Carson truly does embody the spirit of the KKK for sure.

      How remarkably ASTUTE you are!

      Delete
  21. We on the left always knew there was a certain percentage of dimwitted, know-nothings who'd fall for a loud-mouth bloviator Republican's telling people nothing and promising them everything. It's not difficult to understand who the gullible are who think just talking about something phenomenal is the same as explaining how that phenomenal thing will be done and how much it will cost. Rabies Radio and FAUX NEWS have prepared a percentage of our population to accept a stupidly dangerous demagogue in the form of Donald Trump. All Trump needs is a balcony and a fake military uniform to convince a few more easily fooled lunkheads of how phenomenal he is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lol! Hillary's just pissed that she can't count on the Obama coalition of low information voters to put her in power in 2016... Trump has already made too deep an inroad.

      Delete
  22. The Mystery is Solved! Why Donald Trump is Popular With the TGOP.
    Because he is just as stupid they are!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 50% of US voters are below average in IQ. You should know, they all voted for Obama in 2008/2012.

      Delete
    2. Obama the sellout to Iran, Clinton the sellout to North Korea. One and the same. Your all fired...................I'll take Trump

      Delete
  23. This appeared this evening in the WaPo:

    Backers fear Clinton hurt by old weaknesses

    It was supposed to be different this time. After the wounds of 2008, many of them self-inflicted, Hillary Rodham Clinton rebooted for 2016 with a new message, new advisers and new energy.

    But two dynamics have crystallized this month, suggesting the New Hillary is hobbled by old weaknesses. Once again, worried supporters see signs of a bunker mentality in response to bad news about her e-mail server and other controversies...

    ...Several supporters said that while no one is pulling the fire alarm, they see worrisome patterns emerging.

    Among them: insularity, rigidity and a sense that the operation is tone-deaf to changes happening around it....

    [...]

    Democrats in Washington fret that the e-mail liability is something Clinton brought on herself and has managed from a defensive crouch. The decision to operate a separate e-mail system parallel to the regular State Department system has resulted in an investigation that is now out of the control of Clinton and her campaign advisers....


    She really does have a bunker mentality.

    However, she fully realizes that 2016 is her last shot at POTUS. She ain't gonna go easily to the sidelines.

    ReplyDelete
  24. FT,
    If these are not the actions of a guilty person trying either to hide or DESTROY evidence, I'll eat a concrete block for dinner.

    She certainly has exhibited those kinds of actions. No doubt about that.

    ReplyDelete


  25. It's no wonder that Hillary Is afraid to face Bernie Sanders, Hillary has good reason to be afraid , a damn good reason. . While I do not nor ever would support a democrat because of policy Sanders is a great speaker with good solid presentation. I have heard Hillary speak and its like the shriek of a rat caught in a trap.

    But that old man Bernie has power in his voice and his words ring with his honesty which is something else Clinton lacks. Democrats I am here to tell you if you are backing Hillary with ALL of her baggage you are making a HUGE mistake.

    Why would a democrat, ANY democrat back Hillary with this man in the bull pen warmed up and ready to go? Like I said I would NEVER vote for this man but after watching this 4 minute video it left me thinking. Why do democrats NOT run their BEST?

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sorry, but we do our best to keep comments from all sides RELEVANT to the topic of the post. This is about HILLARY and Her Server –– it is NOT abut Donald Trump.

      Either stay on topic , or please refrain from commenting.

      If you have anything POSITIVE to say abut Mrs. CLINTON, we'd be very glad to hear it?

      Delete
  27. A passionate AmericanAugust 16, 2015 at 7:37 AM

    America maybe leaning towards another catastrophe! Don’t let it happen AGAIN!
    America can be many things, as long as we have the proper leadership…something we have been lacking for the past 7 years.
    This country has always been about AMERICANS. Not its politicians, but its people. Somehow, we lost sight of that and let the politicians take over. We need to take it back, and we can start by making sure that
    making sure Hillary/Joe/Bernie/ and Pocahontas, DON’T GET ELECTED!
    And we can do this by making sure that ALL Republicans, conservatives, libertarians and independents, help to elect the Republican nominee, no matter who it may be even if it’s Bush, or Rubio, or Cruz, or Carson, Trump, or … whomever it may be as long as it’s not any of the above mentioned ding-bats. And any vote for a third party; anyone who stays home instead of voting for the Republican will help elect the Democrat, Even if you have to hold your nose and vote for him or her. We HAVE to keep the Hildebeest out of office. Drunken Joe, Old Bernie sandbag, and Pochahantas are just as bad as the Hildebeast. (Well Almost as bad).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ALl right, I don't disagree, but you haven't really said anything. You're just blowing off steam. We are in DIRE need of SUBSTANCE.

      Delete
    2. stomp, snort, and gruntAugust 16, 2015 at 8:38 AM

      What can we say about the previous eight years?

      Does GWB bear any responsibility or did things go to hell in a hand basket suddenly in January 2009?

      Are there not consequences that are the result of previous decisions and actions taken in their wake?

      Nothing is as simple or straight forward as partisans would make them out to be.

      Delete
  28. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This post is NOT about Mr. TRUMP. It is centered on HILLARY and her precious private SERVER.

      Delete
  29. Liberalism Is A Complete Failure, And I’ll Be Glad To Tell You Why!
    But, Lets make this topic a no BULL SHIT ZONE. When you comment, please post information and or opinions to back up your statements. Not just Name-Calling, as I’m sure that the Registered Nurse is going to do.
    Let me begin with the list of their Failed policies.
    Paying our police = failure
    Paying for the roads you use = failure
    Paying for the regulations that make sure you aren't paid pennies as you work is = a failure!
    Paying taxes for regulations that make sure your food, water and air are clean = failure.

    Also, lets not forget the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

    As for the Liberals, excuses’s, please show me how many sane, able bodied adult Americans refuse to work an available job in favor of living off of federal or state funds?

    As for Obam’s second election, Republicans expected the “let’s work together” kind of president. Because once again that’s what he promised, but once again he LIED. Instead, what they have got is a president who has no interest in real compromise what so ever. His “victory” is a result of lies, hypocrisy, duplicity, disingenuousness, dishonesty, intimidation, voter suppression, and other political chicanery.
    Another reason to keep the Democrats out in 2016, If you don’t vote to keep the worst people out of office, like HILLARY, you’re part of the problem. And by not voting at all, all you are doing is surrendering to the enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  30. In a recent Hillary Clinton’s CNN interview Hillary rolled out a string of misrepresentations, or should I say she “misspoke” in defense of her improper e-mail practices. She flatly misrepresented that there was no law to govern her conduct. As we have discussed repeatedly in these pages since March, however, federal criminal statutes, federal record regulations, State Department handbooks, and Mrs. Clinton’s own directions to State Department personnel all plainly governed and prohibited her egregious conduct. A brief recap of how some of those rules apply here lays her “no law” claim to waste: Mrs. Clinton’s maintenance and exclusive use of a private e-mail address to conduct official business violated State Department regulations (in place since at least 2005), which required that such business be conducted whenever possible over official servers in order to protect the security of sensitive State business. : “It is the Department’s general policy that normal day-to-day operations be conducted on an authorized AIS, which has the proper level of security control to provide nonrepudiation, authentication and encryption, to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the resident information.”) For what it’s worth, the White House also claims that Mrs. Clinton violated the Obama administration’s e-mail policy prohibiting private e-mail accounts. Mrs. Clinton herself reportedly cabled State Department employees stationed overseas in 2011 to direct them not to use private e-mails to conduct official business. And she removed at least one ambassador from his post,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you very much. This is exactly the kind of detailed response we had hoped to elicit.

      Delete
  31. "I did not solicit any e-mails from Sidney Blumenthal." = Lie

    "I had no classified information on my server." = Lie

    "I used a private server for convenience." = Lie

    "I had only one mobile device." Lie

    “Chelsea Clinton was jogging around the World Trade Center on 9/11".= Lie
    Immensely insensitive to those who actually were affected by this horrific attack, Hillary later admitted that Chelsea was actually safely in her Union Square apartment at the time of the attack.

    “She landed under sniper fire in Bosnia”.= Lie.
    In true Brian Williams-esque form, to listen to Hillary’s account, she was ducking and running in a dramatic M*A*S*H type arrival scene in fear for her life. In actuality, she and Chelsea can be seen on video walking across the Bosnian tarmac… smiling and greeting well wishers. But hey, anybody could misremember deadly sniper fire, right?

    She was named after Sir Edmund Hillary= Lie.
    One of the first two men to climb Mt. Everest. This one’s just embarrassing. Sir Hillary didn’t actually climb Mt. Everest (AKA, achieve any fame worth naming a child after) until Hillary Clinton was 6 years old. Ouch. So either Hillary’s mom was lying about her namesake Hillary’s entire life, or she waited until Hillary was 6 to name her, or Hillary just, you know, misspoke. Again!

    “Her family was dead broke when they left the White House.”= Lie.
    They only made $12 MILLION the year after Bill Clinton’s Presidency. I guess when you’re used to living off the taxpayer’s billions funding your vacations, private airfare and security, food, housing, and all, a measly few millions could be a rough adjustment, huh?

    And the BIGGIE! The worst of the worst. Benghazi,Benghazi, Benghazi! = LIE, LIE, LIE!.
    We know for a fact, based on State Department documents, that not only was Benghazi a terrorist attack, but Hillary knew it was a terrorist attack which had absolutely nothing to do with a YouTube video. Not only did she lie about Benghazi, she failed to act in response to the attack, and 4 American lives were lost in the conflict.
    But, at this point, what difference does it make, right? But what difference does any of this make?
    There are more, much more, ...but you get the point. The Hildabeast is toast.
    If any of you Libs have any problems with anything that I say here, then please post proof that whatever I have said is not so. and not lies, then point out the inaccuracies! I’d be more that glad to debate the issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Information You DeserveAugust 16, 2015 at 9:24 AM

      Will The Democrats Finally Admit That Hillary Clinton Is A Liar?
      I think that Democrats are finally realizing that. How lomng can anyone even those dingle-berries believe her? There hasn’t been one week that she wasn’t involved with another scandal!
      But still, I think that Biden is the only who can give Hillary a real contest at this point. Even thought Bernie Sanders got a lot of attention this week. I fell that Bernie Sanders BS amounts to next to nothing

      Delete
    2. Thank you again, rabbi. It's hard to believe, but Camp Hillary is STILL floating that absurd story about a wayward YouTube video being the cause of the attack in Benghazi.

      Madam Clinton seems to prefer mendacity to honesty even when there's no particular need for her to prevaricate. She's done herself far more harm by her constant practice of evasion and deceit than if she had simply told the truth.

      Unfortunately, er adherents will hear no ill of her. They dismiss the great pile of evidence showing her to have marked character defects as "mean-spirited right wing propaganda."

      Delete
    3. The Rabbi,
      Mrs. Clinton herself reportedly cabled State Department employees stationed overseas in 2011 to direct them not to use private e-mails to conduct official business.

      Whoa! Why aren't we hearing more about this detail?

      Delete
  32. Hillary Clinton lied? The greatest story teller in America? .........It MUST be a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy!

    The biggest Lying sack of crap that the world has ever seen would never lie!.....

    And although Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Campaign is now effectively over
    What really pisses me off is that there still are so many of these Idiots who will still vote for her.
    The only Democrats who will be voting for Hillary Clinton are the ones who are still satisfied with the way Obama is running this country.
    End of story. End of Her Presidential chance’s. (But not likely the not end of her Presidential hopes..... but that is only temporary.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Watching the fun and having laughs .August 16, 2015 at 9:59 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our ambition is to make this a SNOT-FREE ZONE filled with relative, intelligent commentary, ergo you got the boot.

      Sorry, but we don't suffer fools gladly, and we like gratuitous nastiness even less.

      BUH BYE!

      Delete
  34. Big trouble if the following is true!

    Number of Classified Emails on Hillary’s Private Server Grows to 60:

    The number of emails containing classified information that went through Hillary Clinton’s private server has grown to 60, according to the State Department. And that number is likely to grow as the investigation plows through the 30,000 emails Clinton didn’t delete.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Imagine the damning evidence that must have been on the many thousands she DID delete!

      If she gets away with this, I may pull up stakes, auction off the contents of my house, and spend my sunset years in the Bahamas, although even they are too close for comfort.

      Maybe the Balearic or Canary Islands?

      Delete

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE, SO KINDLY GET OUT AND STAY OUT.

We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––
We WILL use COMMENT ERADICATION.


IN ADDITION

Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.