Slashdot Mirror
Top DNC Staffers Leave Following WikiLeaks Email Scandal (usatoday.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via USA Today: Following the leak of nearly 20,000 Democratic National Committee emails and the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, several more staffers are leaving their positions. USA Today reports Amy Dacey, the chief executive officer of the DNC, Luis Miranda, the party's communications director, and Brad Marshall, chief financial officer, are all leaving the DNC. The statement announcing the staff changes praises the outgoing aides and makes no mention of the email issue. "Thanks in part to the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has adopted the most progressive platform in history, has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships. I'm so grateful for their commitment to this cause, and I wish them continued success in the next chapter of their career," said Donna Brazile, the party's interim chairwoman. Some of the leaked emails from party staffers depicted officials favoring now-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during their primary campaign.
When you fire the entire executive staff for rigging a primary, wouldn't it be a good idea to invalidate the results of the primary? Just saying. I mean that would seem prudent.
"Thanks in part to the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has adopted the most progressive platform in history, has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships."
You mean the money left over after they gave all the donations to Hillary's campaign, violating FEC rules?
Wait until the RNC completely collapses after the disaster Trump has brought to the party. Now he is saying that the election is going to be rigged. This casts doubt on the entire electoral process in the US. What a scumbag. He needs to quit to save himself from further embarrassment.
Rumor is they'll stop using all email and switch to smoke signals. Elizabeth Warren is an alleged expert on that tech.
Table-ized A.I.
...of being forced to take high-paying jobs with the Hillary campaign, the Clinton Foundation, or being hired as big-money lobbyists for the numerous Fortune 500 companies and foreign potentates who have donated to Clinton.
What a rough fate...
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
but the big bosses stay. And especially the practice won't change. Just the people practicing.
The real reason to have the Clinton Foundation: Give these people USD500K a year jobs while they wait for this to blow over.
" In spite of the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has been forced to adopt a platform that's still more conservative than Richard Nixon's ", has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Wait until the RNC completely collapses after the disaster Trump has brought to the party. Now he is saying that the election is going to be rigged. This casts doubt on the entire electoral process in the US. What a scumbag. He needs to quit to save himself from further embarrassment.
I dunno, looking at the way the DNC violated FEC rules in order to beat Sanders, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they paid to rig the elections.
Remember those Trump protestors? The ones starting fights at Trump rallies? DNC paid staffers.
Remember Trump making his hats in China? Complete and total fabrication.
Remember all the lies, hatred, and general bad mouthing he spews? Mostly made up.
The Democrats are spewing a deluge of lies and misdirection at Trump, because it's all they got. Trump beats Hillary on pretty-much every political position, and the voters know it.
Keep with the insults, we need the public to get tired of this and see it for what it really is: the last ditch efforts of a morally bankrupt campaign.
(Here's a good one that was top news yesterday: Trump having a conversation with the devil. Republicans should totally start throwing insults back at Clinton, because that's what the election is all about!)
And this just came in.
Apparently the Clinton foundation took in tons of donation money in return for letting the Russians get access to advanced technology.
From that article:
“The Clintons, they get their donations and speaking fees in the millions of dollars. The Russians get access to advanced US technology. The tech companies [that participated in the reset, including Cisco, Intel, Microsoft] get special access to the Russian market and workforce.
“But the American people get nothing. In fact, we get a rival — Russia — with enhanced technological capabilities. At best, that makes them a tougher competitor [in legitimate commerce],” Schweizer said.
“At worst, they get a more robust military, with technologies that we helped develop, and that can be sold to our enemies.”
Sad.
1) Term Limits
2) Campaign Finance Reform
The reason why Clinton and Trump are both the candidates are for the two items I mention but for VERY different reasons.
I was going to vote for Trump because Hillary has led such a dishonest life without any challenge from the only source which normally would have kept her kind out of office, but the media is so corrupt she skates by... but the sum of all Trump-isms has pushed me over the edge. He does not have the intelligence - i mean the common sense type - to be president of this once great USA.
I will be staying home.
.... such as a sham primary, extensive money laundering to get around contribution limits, racist commentary on various groups, condescension towards unions, and so on.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
"investing in state party partnerships"
This sounds a lot like bribery to me.
Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
Sticks and stones. For someone who is supposed to be one of those tolerant progressives you sure can spew the vitrol. All you seem to do is call names and spread hate. If you want people to consider your position on any stance its best to use an adult attitude and start respecting other people even if you disagree with them. Hypocrisy in such magnitude only undermines any point you're hey ng to make.
Wasserman Scultz's "resignation" was smug and facile. She and her cronies had already achieved their mission of handing the nomination to Hillary on a platter. And there was Hillary praising her and promising to reward her and ongoing role.
Only fit punishment is expulsion from the party and rehosting the convention. To let Hillary keep it is to let her keep stolen goods. Sure, maybe she would have got them anyway, but they weren't Wasserman Scultz's to give to her.
The whole thing is a disgrace but the DNC elite will make sure Hillary gets to the stolen goods. It's too bad Hillary is only facing Trump because she's so disliked any half-decent Republican would whip her ass in the polls.
Remember all the lies, hatred, and general bad mouthing he spews?
Yes I do. And the Pulitzer-Prize-winning site Politifact confirms the extent of his habitual lying.
Here's politifact dilligently checking Jeff Sessions' comment "there are about 350,000 people who succeed in crossing our borders illegally each year,".
[politifact:] The number of immigrants illegally in the country is staying the same or getting smaller. We rate Sessions’ statement False.
Let's go see what Wikipedia says about illegal immigration:
[DHS, from Wikipedia] Numbers of new illegal immigrants per year crossing the border illegally are not directly countable, and are estimated from the number who are caught trying. For FY 2015, DHS reported 337,117 apprehensions. [3] Using an estimated catch rate of 33%, the number crossing without detection would be 510,000 per year (337,000 / 0.67).
So, he's basically citing DHS numbers and being conservative, yet Politifact determined it was "false".
Additionally, note that the previous paragraph is not in the current version of the Wikipedia article, it was removed *after* Sessions' speech!
I took the trouble to look at the edit history right after the speech (wondering myself how many illegals come into this country each year), and noted that the page had not been substantially edited in over a month, and that paragraph had been there for quite a long time.
So I don't really see Politifact as a neutral observer any more.
I mean, they didn't even *bother* to look at Wikipedia pages that are available when they write their results!
What other things do they get wrong, and do they have a hidden agenda?
Remember all the lies, hatred, and general bad mouthing he spews?
So, yes, I do remember his extensive bad-mouthing of many people over the past 9 months or so. Thanks for asking.
You're remembering the press reports, not what he actually said.
Dog down to the truth - you'll get there eventually.
The party needs to purge its entire leadership, and make Bernie the chairman. Yeah, he may make the party a Euro style Social Democrat party, but that's where the popular Dem opinion is, if one removes the 'super-delegates'.
Why the fuck were we drafting college graduates? That is plain old retarded...
A purge, a putsch an execution ... all in a weeks work for the DNC (Soviet Central Committee).
HillyBilly can lick my balls in County Lock Up.
Ha ha
Sanders spent most of his campaign reiterating that the system is rigged. The DNC and Clinton proved him right.
It's as if hardly any of you Americans even saw this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEsb9MftJC8
I'll start with that. I will follow by saying I acknowledge that Hillary Clinton won the endorsement of the party. If we dropped the superdelegates completely, and went only on the representative state delegates, she still wins. Yeah, the party very strongly preferred her but the vote is what it is. The party was not greatly receptive towards Bernie but it wasn't openly preventing him from running his campaign either.
More importantly, by doing so well in the primaries, Bernie was able to significantly influence Hillary's platform, and the DNC platform as a whole. Now things that would not have been discussed are front-and-center, with official party stances. For this Bernie backer, this makes it much more palatable to vote for Hillary as now she represents some of what Bernie was running for.
It's a shame that in the end the DNC nominated a candidate who the GOP could defeat with a ficus tree. Literally any other republican could have wiped the floor with Hillary just by the number of republicans who would turn out in massive innumerable droves simply to vote anti-Clinton. Similarly Trump could be defeated by a ficus tree, based only on the number of people who cannot stand him. However when we have a race between two greatly un-liked (arguably un-likeable) people it is hard to say which way it will break.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Trump wasn't a "college graduate". He had just graduated from a military academy. Think about that. You go to a military academy and then dodge the draft. Five total deferments, one of which was for "heel spurs" that he says have "healed".
You are welcome on my lawn.
It's not a resignation if you're moving to another position for more money.
That's called a promotion.
It was supposed to be Jeb on the Republican side
We got the joke option
Parties have been doing this for decades, they just don't normally have the Russian gov't hacking into their computers. Bernie is nice and all but he never had a chance. Trump would run adds where Bernie says he's a Socialist and that would scare the pants off a certain class of voter who doesn't know the difference between a National Socialist and a Democratic Socialist. Bernie never planned on winning and he told anyone who would listen that. He wanted to move the party platform to the left and support progressive ideals. He did that. I'd like more, but America is a right wing country. At least it's voters are. That can change, but not all at once. Not overnight. Real Revolutions don't really end well and peacefully. Positive change is a process, not a revolution.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
skip election day at play
or check a bad box
the choice is yours all the same
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Every day Trump puts more ammunition in the Democrat's arsenal. Every day this man makes a bigger fucking joke of himself. Now he's basically given a big fuck you to Ryan and McCain, with the obvious message being "I don't give a flying fuck about the Republican Party". In other words, he's an independent in all but name, who grandstanded himself into the GOP nomination, and now feels absolutely no loyalty at all to other party members who are running for election.
I can only assume he's either a fucking lunatic, or he really is a Democrat plant intent on tearing the still-beating heart out of the Republicans. At every instance he's testing the GOP's ability to stick with him, and sooner or later, a whole lot of Republicans big and small are just going to go "Fuck it" and either hold their nose and vote Clinton, or just stay home. Even the big money bags like the Koch Brothers won't touch the guy. He's willfully castrating the GOP's ability to raise money and campaign. He is probably the worst candidate for a major political party in fifty years, if not ever.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Wait, Trump's a Democrat? That might explain why the bought-and-paid-for Repubs are so against him.
Because he lost? He lost in absolute numbers, and so far as I can tell, none of the delegates or superdelegates had a gun to their head.
It seems for Sanders and Trump supporters "rigged" translates literally to "my candidate didn't/won't win." At least Bernie was big enough to realize that however much he might personally dislike Clinton, she remains by a wide margin a better presidential candidate than Trump. Trump, on the other hand, is doing his best to even convince his fellow Republicans (if there are any left that actually believe he is a Republican) that he's not fit for the job.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The Clinton campaign did everything they could to silence Bernie's message, avoid debating with him, schedule the debates they DID have when no one would be watching (which they're trying again - notice that the debate schedule for the fall places as many debates as possible against major NFL games), and remove potential Bernie voters from the voting rolls.
There were numerous voting irregularities throughout the Democratic primaries, all in states Clinton "won."
There's a very good chance that Bernie would have won the primaries if they hadn't been rigged against him.
No, there was no chance. There never was, and trying to pull claims of "irregularities" out of thin air and put them out there as true is absurd. Bernie Sanders was never going to be the Democratic nominee, nor was he ever going to be President. He clearly realizes that now, so why can't you?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Your country? So now you claim to own the USA and want to expel "white trash"? You are a hypocrite.
I knew your lame-ass would say something in this discussion. You still suck.
The grand and sovereign nation of Russia has managed to influence the elections of the evil capitalists pig nation of the United States. By sabotaging the election and spreading internal division between left and right, the great Nation of Russia are sure to be the victors in the upcoming elections. The Stupid USAians continue to believe that they have a choice in the upcoming election. By the time the USAians realize what has happened to them the will be totally owned.
President Putin wishes the USAian populace to continue to believe that the (republicans | democrats) are evil and that the only solution is to vote for the (democrats | republicans) depending upon which geographic region of the USA you were raised in.
So basically more of the same which has been going on for awhile. It's just becoming more and more public knowledge now. Suddenly the tin-foil hat people aren't appearing so tinfoilly and more.
When you fire the entire executive staff for rigging a primary ...
They are being rewarded not fired. Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz has already done, they are probably moving from the DNC to Hillary's campaign, and ultimately on to positions in the Clinton administration. Like Tim Kaine, another former DNC chair who has supported the Clintons for many years.
Hillary's been nominated, the DNC's main work is done. The important folks move on to the presidential campaign. The less important folks stay behind at the DNC and work on state and congressional stuff. These people are leaving on schedule. Washerman Schultz had to leave a few days ahead of schedule, nothing more.
They fear no repercussions for any of this since Bernie's followers will be good little Democrats and vote for Hillary in the end. That is all that matters. The revolution is dead despite Bernie's claims to the contrary. He got on board with Hillary so he will not lose the committee positions and other advantages he has in the Senate. To go against her would mean he would be ostracized, so he plays ball. He talks of the platform, platforms never mean a damn thing. They are just symbolic appeasements for the fringe elements of the party. Always has been, now Bernie's revolution joins those ranks.
A Hillary victory means everything Bernie fought for was for nothing, everything Hillary and company did vindicated. Hillary and the party machine will have forgotten Bernie in a matter of days, any pain or embarrassment he caused fading by the day, soon to be forgotten. Soon to be remembered as nothing more than a defeated tough opponent. What he stood for forgotten, just that he was somehow a "tough opponent", no one remembering precisely why.
Because the primary was rigged. A laughable number of debates compared to 2008, and scheduled to air at times guaranteed to have few viewers. A primary schedule front-loaded with conservative southern states (most of which would never vote for Hillary in the general) to give the conservative candidate an early claim to "frontrunner" status. And that was right out in the open, before any of the DNC's outright ratfucking was revealed.
That's what Hillbots said in 2008, too. Sanders has a solid record and his positions are popular with far more voters than Hillary. Whereas Hillary's record is solid shit, and her positions are unpopular with voters. But hey, waddya know - when you start with the Mt. Everest of name recognition, have the banks/media/neocons/party bosses all lined up behind you - it is possible to beat a senator that most Americans had never heard of eight months ago!
Hillbots keep saying that too, but the Dem candidate is no lesser evil, not this time. Trump attacks the Iraq war as a stupid idea; Hillary replicated it in Syria and Libya. Hillary loves the TPP, Trump does not.
And every attack that can be made against Trump can be thrown right back in Hillbot faces. He's a racist? So is she - superpredators and deporting children - to the country she helped overthrow - to "send a message to their parents". He's corrupt? Cattle futures, pay-to-play with the Clinton Foundation, Goldman Sachs speeches, and so on.
Even the big money bags like the Koch Brothers won't touch the guy. He's willfully castrating the GOP's ability to raise money and campaign. He is probably the worst candidate for a major political party in fifty years, if not ever.
Why are you so upset that he isn't sucking up to billionaires for campaign contributions?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
right after she resigned, supposedly in disgrace, after successfully rigging things for her friend Hillary. Mission completed, reward achieved.
If these lower-level people were of service to Hill or Deb, they'll be richly rewarded with better jobs in Hillary's campaign and likely already have jobs lined-up within the Hillary administration.
This sort of stuff is common with Democrats. An example I just happen to recall with enough detail at the moment to cite:
in 1992 Democrat Barbara Boxer was running against Republican Bruce Herschensohn for a senate seat from California. Days before the election, Bob Mulholland showed up at a Herschensohn press event and destroyed his momentum by declaring that Herschensohn had been hanging out in strip clubs. It turned out that two people at the supposedly neutral ABC had tipped-off Bob (the Democrat party guy) about rumors who then told California Democratic Party Chairman Phil Angelides and people within Boxer's campaign. When Bob (a Democrat party guy NOT a journalist) showed up at the presser, he waited for the right moment, then unfurled a poster for a strip club and clobbered Bruce with a question about it, which Bruce naturally failed spectacularly to answer and was unable to clean up until long after the campaign ended in his loss. At the time, people in BOTH parties denounced both the tactic and the fact that this sex-centric attack was launched in this flammatory way and with so few verified facts. In the same campaign season, Bob had been caught intercepting registration cards of voters who tried to register for the Green Party and sending them back with letters pushing them to register as Democrats. Boxer and party leader Angelides both distanced themselved from the supposedly tainted dirty trixter Bob and pretended to be outraged defenders of privacy, clean elections, etc. Then, only weeks after she won the elections, Barbara Boxer had him hired and promoted. The "outrage" and distancing was only until after the voters stopped paying attention.
The point of that tale is NOT the specifics of that specific case. The point is that politicians pretending to be shocked/disappointed with party staff and operatives and "firing" them BEFORE an election to posture as trustworthy people with principles, only to re-hire and even promote these supposed bad actors as soon as the voters are looking away is a standard political tactic. The politicians almost always get away with it because the voters have notoriously short attention spans for political junk. The operatives know all this which is why they are willing to be so dirty and "risk their careers" being so nasty - they know they are in no danger at all. They know they will get a few weeks off at most and then be promoted and paid more and given more power. Just look at Debbie now, and watch her in 2017. Same for these newly "fired" DNC staffers.
and to the dismay (and I'm sure, disgust) of liberals everywhere Rush Limbaugh called it once again: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/da...
This whole thing was in the can for Hillary right from the get go. It just goes to show that liberals will stop at absolutely nothing in the pursuit of political power. And spare me the "sore loser" speech. It's one thing to try and screw Republicans over - they screwed Bernie and his followers. People in their own party.
The current Democrat strategy is to try and discredit Trump. There is no mention of Clinton achievements - because there are none. Everything she has touched has been a colossal fuck up. Including, but not limited to, the death of four Americans in Libya on her watch as Secretary of State. Followed by a cover up that she continues to lie about.
All the while, her and Bill are operating a sham of a "charity" that only donates 10 cents out of every dollar it takes in. Funded in large part by corrupt foreign governments that treat women and gays like shit. While maintaining, with a straight face, that they are the party that actually cares about women and gays.
I, for one, can't wait for the next round of WikiLeaks emails. You can bet there there will be plenty more evidence of lying and corruption in the Clinton camp. So keep up the Trump attack ads and various head fakes. Nobody is buying it.
But no, go on, rant about irrelevant nonsense and just ignore the fact that they are effectively above the law at this point.
What laws are you referring to? There aren't any. Aside from party bylaws (which the party leaders generally can change at a whim), we're not talking about actual laws for the most part. If the DNC leadership want's to be a bunch of douchebags who pick favorites, they're allowed to do that. If they want to funnel all the money one way or the other, there is really nothing stopping them. Anyone who gets involved with a political party and has the slightest belief that a party is a representative democracy is delusional. When you are talking about real power expecting people to play nice is absurdly naive.
Personally I have no use for political parties. The R's and D's offset each other and effectively make my vote more valuable which is fine by me. Unfortunately I still have to pick which turd is the shiniest.
Because the primary was rigged.
Expecting a fair fight in politics is idiotic. The only people who think that ever happens are naive rubes. Those who are realistic about winning scramble for every advantage they can get, fair or not. Those who can rig the game, will rig the game. If Bernie or his supporters actually thought they were going to get a fair fight and wouldn't have to get their hands dirty then they were too dumb to deserve the nomination. I hugely respect the moral stance but the real world doesn't work that way.
we'll have more of the same, lots of grandstanding but ultimately compromise
We haven't seen any compromise from the republicans in over a decade. If a republican shows any inclination to compromise, he/she is immediately voted out during the next primary and replaced with some ideologically pure tea party douchebag who promises to be even less willing to compromise. The only upside is that a Congress that can't get anything done is a Congress that can't cause any new problems.
I agree though that while Hillary is basically a status quo vote and that sucks, Trump would be an unmitigated disaster. I feel like I'm trying to pick the prettiest turd but Trump is just post-chili diarrhea in that competition.
He's sucking up to foreign politicians for money. It's totally OK though.
Clinton is a square shooter. Clinton 2016!
We have these things called opinion polls that help us determine if anyone has rigged an election to the extent that the election result changed. Pretty much all opinion polls have showed that Clinton was ahead amongst Democratic voters over Sanders. If they rigged it, they didn't make any difference.
It sucks. I'd rather it have been the opposite too, but whatever (dubious) evidence there is that the DNC "rigged" anything, the reality is that the primaries reflected the will of the people.
Bear in mind that Clinton is seen as an experienced, level headed, leader who's worked at almost every level of government, while Sanders was seen, for the most part, as a wildcard, ranting and raving about injustices. Even with the polls showing Sanders as a better candidate to defeat Trump, it's not hard to believe that Clinton both had more natural Democratic support (especially amongst so-called Centrists) and that others were genuinely scared of Sanders.
Also ask yourself why the DNC was so heavily pro-Clinton. Is it possible that the DNC reflected the mood of the Democratic Party itself?
Sanders did well. His Republican equivalent would probably be Ron Paul, and Ron Paul never did anything like as well amongst Republicans. It was impressive, but it wasn't enough.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I am not surprised how liberal news media pretty much ignores this and focuses on what Trump says or does. What's funny is that I think liberal media is so clueless that they are actually helping Trump not hurting him. I think by now most Democrats are dumb enough to let this go over their heads deserve Clinton.
The rest are smart enough to figure out how rigged the Democratic system is. At least Trump won his primary by the votes and delegates. No strong arm tactics which obviously got Hillary nominated. I'm sure eventually it will come out that many Democrats felt they had to rigged the system to even get Hillary nominated.
What does that tell you about her weakness in her own party?
Ahh, the standard whine of insecure conservatives immediately before or after they say something idiotic.
My post has nothing to do with being conservative, being liberal, being left, or being right (I don't identify with any of these things, by the way.) It just goes to show that maybe, just maybe, your starry ideas about a perfect world probably aren't as perfect as you think they are.
"A primary schedule front-loaded with conservative southern states"
Are you honestly saying that the Clinton campaign went back in time 15 years or so and rigged it so that Southern states would move their primaries earlier so that in 2016 Clinton could beat Bernie Sanders? The party doesn't even get to determine the primary schedule to a large extent.
And these people are rearranging the deck chairs.
Apparently Hillary's thick black cock has made Trumps anus leak.
Hillary's thick black cock pounding Donalds willing anus will help.
Except when the DNC works with the Clinton campaign against the Sanders' campaign and conceals money laundering by the Clinton Super PAC. Moron.
Yes there was a chance. 3 million people could not vote in NYS primary - 120,000 were purged from the voter rolls. Millions others were denied access to vote in other primaries. So yes Bernie had a real chance. You can fuck off now.
I would bet that both sides were rigged (probably by the same people). If Trump is "Hitler", does that make Hillary "Joseph Stalin"? Which would make Bernie "Vladimir Lenin"...
Not a fan of the Dems, but no matter what shenanigans went on to get Hillary nominated, the drug-induced cluster fsck of a process that gave us Trump as a nominated candidate makes it look like a Sunday school class.
I just don't get why everyone is so up in arms? This has been the case of politics for centuries. Dating back to the Greeks and Romans. Hell, there is no difference of what they do and what happens in the Godfather. Do something for me, and I will reward you. Watch the movie Ides of March. The only reason why it is much more open now is because of technology. I don't understand why people don't wake up and there is no you vs them or Republican vs Democrat. It is truly the people vs politicians, not just the president.
Vulgarity is the fool's fig leaf.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
This is also not even counting Hill's blackface picture from her Halloween bash, and her support for the bill that essentially tripled the jailing of minorities.
Also her being on video on CNN uttering the words "We need to build a wall!" and not in a sarcastic way.
As a stupid idea now. Back in 2003-2005 on the other hand....
The only way his answer is any better than Hillary's is if (a) you ignore history or (b) if you get Hillary confused with "If I knew then what I know now I would still support the war" Jeb
I guess I just would like more than hindsight in a president.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
You know, cites would add credibility to what you said.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Except c) that dog still don't hunt. Trump wasn't privy to classified intelligence as a U.S. Senator - Hillary was, she just didn't bother to read it. John Edwards had an unequivocal "yeah, I fucked up that vote" confession back in 2005. Whereas right now Hillary still engages in the chickenshit cop-out of blaming Bush, when she was too lazy to read the briefings she was given. And she can't blame Bush for repeating the Iraq clusterfuck in Syria and Libya, which she did as SOS. So, any way you wish to split the hair, Trump is better than Hillary on the Iraq War.
No lesser evil. Not this time.
I can only assume he's either a fucking lunatic, or he really is a Democrat plant intent on tearing the still-beating heart out of the Republicans.
Occam is on line 1 for you.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Platforms are nothing. They are universally ignored once in office. Its a placebo offered at conventions to "give a voice" to fringe elements. Nothing more. A "voice" that lasts about as long as the convention.
Bernie bowed to protect his Senate position. He would have been ostracized, a pariah. No good committee positions, no role in caucusing when legislation is being drafted or considered, few if any Democrats willing to work with him, etc. He had a choice, the "revolution" or his "career". He chose "career".
I know lots of Bernie supporters like myself who are disgusted that our vote doesn't count at all and are now more likely to vote for Trump or not vote at all. If all Bernie supporters fail to vote at all, that is still a vote for Trump. It will take all of us Bernie supporters to bring a democrat to the white house. I don't see that happening.
The anger of Bernie supports will fade and by November they will be good little Democrats and vote for their party's choice. They are just going to complain for a while but come November they will vote for Hillary. Her and he supporter's actions will be vindicated.
They don't have to; Trump says rude things out loud for the world to hear.
Table-ized A.I.
Reminds me of a quote:
We "get" to see the meat grinders of politics in action here.
Table-ized A.I.
I don't care if he didn't have access to classified intelligence. He supported it in 2003-2005. And he has the same intelligence now (well, any minute now he'll get classified intelligence) that he's saying "it was horrible, I was always against it."
I also, honestly, don't care about it. If it wasn't a point that other people cared about, I wouldn't consider it relevant to the discussion of who should be POTUS. It's just a wash between them.
I mean, I guess it would be nice if we elected a president who opposed the war at the time... but after 8 years of a president like that, would we even care about that issue?
Also, I have no idea why you think Iraq was anything like Syria or Libya.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Ward Churchill (another Democrat fake Indian college professor) will be at the Denver signalling post, and Rachel Dolezal (the Democrat fake black lady who was running an NAACP branch in Washington state) will provide her deep insights as she translates into Ebonics.
Curious:
Why do so many pasty white liberal Democrats champion racial preferences for minorities and then get themselves jobs by pretending to be members of those minorities????
Aren't they depriving members of those communities of the opportunities when they do this? Is that racist? Hmmmm much to ponder.
and the voters aren't the same thing. There's a _lot_ of voter suppression in America :(. And googling "Diebold voter fraud" is terrifying.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
none of the delegates or superdelegates had a gun to their head.
You don't know much about the Clintons, do you?
Seth Rich
Deborah Jeane Palfrey
http://www.freewebs.com/jeffhead/liberty/liberty/bdycount.txt (for anything before 1997)
https://www.truthorfiction.com/clintonfriends/
Even the apologists saying "It was just a robbery!" tend to ignore the fact that none of these "shot-in-the-head robbery victims" had anything fucking stolen. The money was still all there. Definite Robberies. Just a few hundred coincidences -- like everyone the Clintons know seem to die in plane crashes (one in 11 million chance each) -- coincidences.
You're supporting a cold-blooded murderer.
DNC executives resigning like rats abandoning a sinking ship. But its not enough, every single one of those rats should be charged with election fraud.
Nobody has proven that Warren has no native Americans ancestors*, and there's no record of Dolezal claiming to be black. The NAACP even said being black is NOT a qualification for the position. They didn't fire her, she left on her own volition.
You are off base.
* There is no clear-cut definition of that anyhow. Humans are all mutts. At the very most, DNA tests can show that one is probably related to a particular group of people at a particular place and time.
Table-ized A.I.
Some of the leaked emails from party staffers depicted officials favoring now-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during their primary campaign.
This makes it sound like each DNS staff member must all either be for Hillary or for Bernie. Just stating in an email that some prefer one over the other shouldn't matter.
The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
3.2 million, which works out to be 27% of registered voters in New York that where locked out of the primary from the word go, 126k purged from the democratic party rolls just before the primary from Brooklyn alone, Brooklyn being Sanders' home town. https://news.vice.com/article/new-york-attorney-general-investigate-alleged-voter-suppression-primary
Top dem officials are being investigated for this fraudulent primary where sanders won damn near every county, save the most populated ones, which are usually considered to be far more progressive than what we saw.
http://nypost.com/2016/05/05/top-democrat-will-be-suspended-for-mysterious-voter-purge/
So you care more about the storyline than the facts or accountability?
And why might that be. You only had both parties and the entire establishment media supporting the invasion - shocking development that most Americans also supported the war, given that they weren't privy to the actual intelligence briefings.
Who was privy? Hillary Rodham Clinton. So, yeah, having access to information the common citizen did not does matter. And of course, Trump's 2003 support for the Iraq War made no difference in the invasion - as opposed to the yea vote from a U.S. Senator. And yeah, if Trump had been the one in office at the time while Hillary was a private citizen, the same rules would apply to Trump in her place.
We shouldn't care about the possibility of another warmongering fool getting thousands more Americans killed, and between one and two million people getting killed in more illegal wars?
How were they not like Iraq? Big Ebul Dictator needs to be overthrown and his country made safe for democracy, because he was abusing his own people, clamped down on civil rights, was a threat to his neighbors, blah blah blah. The fake concern over WMD's was copied straight from the Iraq playbook to Syria. Want to say the lack of boots (special forces use moccasins, not boots) and a long occupation makes those two regional instabilities too different from Iraq? Okay....but you know who really wanted boots on the ground in Syria, right?
HRC.