The Goat Pen

Bklyn wrote:

eCat wrote:if something wasn't there that was significant, I don't think Comey would have bothered with it.

It is my understanding that Comey only knew of the metadata (basically the timestamp and the "Froms" and "Tos"). From what I've read (granted it's not a lot, I'm just burned out by all of the depravity on all sides during this election), the Bureau is not even certain if the emails are dupes, or not. So, I don't think anyone can say it is significant or not.

I agree, though, that Obama is doing all he can to not politicize this any further and giving Comey as much of a benefit of the doubt that he can.

In my view, though, Comey rolled dice on this unprecedented move to placate people in the Bureau or the Party. If nothing pops on this, history will look at him much like Ollie North...but Ollie has done okay in the wallet. So, maybe it doesn't matter.

it doesn't fit his M.O. though. This can't be about the guys not sitting with him at the lunch table because he let her slip. He had her dead to rights and opted not to. He's 3 months out from not having this job anymore anyways and going into the private sector. He didn't need this headache, especially with the possibility of a Hillary election. Trump isn't going to do anything for him as the FBI head under a democratic president.

Something out there is going to put his ass in a crack if he didn't open it back up.

I think you're so tired of hearing Trump voters characterized as idiots that you're just doing the same thing to Hillary voters. As it is, I just think she's a better choice than Trump, warts and all. She seems to be of above average intelligence, but not very charismatic and prone to bone-headed errors, but nothing more egregious as pretty much any other politician at the federal level, although obviously when you get to the presidential level, there's a difference in scale. But if I believed for one second that Hillary was the evil Machiavellian genius that you're making her out to be, I'd be very excited about voting for her instead of just tepidly voting for her b/c I don't want an absolute buffoon who I don't think is very bright as my president...

eCat wrote:it doesn't fit his M.O. though. This can't be about the guys not sitting with him at the lunch table because he let her slip. He had her dead to rights and opted not to. He's 3 months out from not having this job anymore anyways and going into the private sector. He didn't need this headache, especially with the possibility of a Hillary election. Trump isn't going to do anything for him as the FBI head under a democratic president.

Maybe he did have her dead to rights, bowed to pressures from parties I can't name, and let it pass...and now it's fucking with him. PLUS, being 3 months out from leaving as Director and out of favor with the Party and players who will hold the purse on the majority of his private sector opportunities, is a decent motivating force to "make things right." It's not something that takes a big leap of logic to embrace.

I just keep going back to the fact that all I've read is that there are many emails, the metadata was turned over and they want to go through it. I have not heard anything about the substance of any particular correspondence. I do know that Huma lawyered up...but I don't blame her. They've been on her ass for 10 months doing opposition research.

hedge wrote:I think you're so tired of hearing Trump voters characterized as idiots that you're just doing the same thing to Hillary voters. As it is, I just think she's a better choice than Trump, warts and all. She seems to be of above average intelligence, but not very charismatic and prone to bone-headed errors, but nothing more egregious as pretty much any other politician at the federal level, although obviously when you get to the presidential level, there's a difference in scale. But if I believed for one second that Hillary was the evil Machiavellian genius that you're making her out to be, I'd be very excited about voting for her instead of just tepidly voting for her b/c I don't want an absolute buffoon who I don't think is very bright as my president...

Yeah, I can't accept any list of shit about Hillary that is not lined up against Trump's list. I am not a fan of her. I think she's a horrible politician. However, based off of all I know about Trump, Hillary has my vote if it turns out her emails show that she killed Biggie...and I love Biggie.

hedge wrote:I think you're so tired of hearing Trump voters characterized as idiots that you're just doing the same thing to Hillary voters. As it is, I just think she's a better choice than Trump, warts and all. She seems to be of above average intelligence, but not very charismatic and prone to bone-headed errors, but nothing more egregious as pretty much any other politician at the federal level, although obviously when you get to the presidential level, there's a difference in scale. But if I believed for one second that Hillary was the evil Machiavellian genius that you're making her out to be, I'd be very excited about voting for her instead of just tepidly voting for her b/c I don't want an absolute buffoon who I don't think is very bright as my president...

well that's your call. While I don't have high standards in regards to the integrity of a politician, I don't want one that believes the law does not apply to them to the extent she/he has contempt for them.

Hillary not only has contempt for the law but for the American system, hell most likely for the American people.

I don't trust Hillary to improve America nor would I believe that it would be her priority in office. The only priority she has would be to enrich herself to the fullest extent possible while in office.

Bklyn wrote: PLUS, being 3 months out from leaving as Director and out of favor with the Party and players who will hold the purse on the majority of his private sector opportunities, is a decent motivating force to "make things right." It's not something that takes a big leap of logic to embrace.

.

So why didn't he just do it a month ago when he had clear evidence of gross negligence? It actually is a big leap of faith. He was as much a lame duck FBI director a month ago as he is now.

Do you really think the Clintons have done any more to enrich themselves thru their political offices than, say, Dick Cheney or Henry Kissinger? And that's just to name two of the most obvious examples. They all do it. I'm not saying it's right, but I am saying it's a complete double standard to act like Bill and Hillary have done it any more (to say nothing of some superhumanly egregious level like you are suggesting) than anybody else has. For better or worse (and obviously, it's worse), politics is a business. I don't believe for one minute that they haven't all been doing it since George Washington, or hell, since Caesar. Hillary is no different, and like I said before, when we do on the rare occasion get somebody in there like Jimmy Carter who urged people to turn their lights off and in fact set the example by keeping the AC around 74 in the summer in the White House, everybody thinks he's a dork and a loser and then they vote for Reagan and Bush Sr. Speaking of Bush Sr., I seriously doubt the Clintons enriched themselves thru their government contacts any more than the Bush fambly has. But again, that's the business of politics. I'd like to believe that there is some pure hearted statesman out there who is completely un-self-interested, but then you're talking about Peter Sellers's character Chauncy in Being There. But that's a movie, not reality...

hedge wrote:Do you really think the Clintons have done any more to enrich themselves thru their political offices than, say, Dick Cheney or Henry Kissinger? And that's just to name two of the most obvious examples. They all do it. I'm not saying it's right, but I am saying it's a complete double standard to act like Bill and Hillary have done it any more (to say nothing of some superhumanly egregious level like you are suggesting) than anybody else has. For better or worse (and obviously, it's worse), politics is a business. I don't believe for one minute that they haven't all been doing it since George Washington, or hell, since Caesar. Hillary is no different, and like I said before, when we do on the rare occasion get somebody in there like Jimmy Carter who urged people to turn their lights off and in fact set the example by keeping the AC around 74 in the summer in the White House, everybody thinks he's a dork and a loser and then they vote for Reagan and Bush Sr. Speaking of Bush Sr., I seriously doubt the Clintons enriched themselves thru their government contacts any more than the Bush fambly has. But again, that's the business of politics. I'd like to believe that there is some pure hearted statesman out there who is completely un-self-interested, but then you're talking about Peter Sellers's character Chauncy in Being There. But that's a movie, not reality...

I didn't vote for Dick Cheney or Henry Kissinger

Matter of fact, I've been pushing Bernie Sanders as an authentic honest candidate on here as far as politics go questioning why a Democrat would choose Hillary over him and we saw what Hillary did to him. Pretty much the entire DNC as an organization worked to shut him down as a candidate.

If you're going to reward her with the idea that "everyone does it", so be it. I won't.

That's part of the reason I'm pushing for Trump - I saw what the GOP did to him.

It's not a reward, it's just accepting reality. I would be happy to vote for Bernie if he'd gotten the nomination, he does seem to be of a different cut than most. Likewise Ron Paul or hell even Ross Perot. Maybe their day will come and I kinda hope it does, and maybe the shit we're going thru now is just a necessary step to get there, but to me, Trump isn't the answer. But all we've got now is a choice b/w Hillary and Trump, and I'm not going to hold Hillary to some higher standard than any president in my lifetime and probably in history outside Jimmy Carter and maybe a couple others (who are all probably regarded as complete failures as far as being the president) as the reason I absolutely won't vote for her. I honestly don't even think Trump wants to be president and he's probably shocked that he got nominated and then just had to go with it. I get all the "tired of politics as usual" sentiment behind Trump, but I really don't think he has what it takes to be president. I don't think the country will implode if he's elected, but I strongly believe that the financial markets will go into free fall (for starters) and our status around the world will nosedive. We'll be a laughingstock. Fortunately, I don't think that's going to happen, but if it does, we'll get thru it somehow. But I would suggest taking any money you've got invested anywhere and putting it in a savings account, even at zero percent interest...

Also, if you voted for Bush, then you voted for Cheney...

"I feel bad for Huma. She's always seemed to be a decent, intelligent, loyal and hardworking wonk."

And she's pretty hot in my book. I like the skinny ones.

Her bad luck was ending up with Weiner. I have the feeling he may have loaded up the laptop with her emails to use as leverage in the future. It's always the scumbags that bring things down.

sardis wrote:"I feel bad for Huma. She's always seemed to be a decent, intelligent, loyal and hardworking wonk."

And she's pretty hot in my book. I like the skinny ones.

Her bad luck was ending up with Weiner. I have the feeling he may have loaded up the laptop with her emails to use as leverage in the future. It's always the scumbags that bring things down.

Hillary was who suggested she go out with him.

hedge wrote:It's not a reward, it's just accepting reality

but that's the point - it doesn't have to be the reality

look, Trump isn't the answer to the who is the best man to be president, but he is an answer. The question is will the public continue to accept the status quo from politicians who only care about the public 6 months before the election.

Now Trump may turn the office of president into a reality show, he may get into a new pissing contest with congress every day and make some horrible blunders in foreign policy

but at the end of the day, the takeaway will be that the American people would just as soon have an asshat running the country than another career politician

and thats when they take notice and start trying to fix the country.

My take is 4 years of an asshat and then the next election gives us some more serious candidates, or just reward the status quo and we march toward the abyss.

I guess if she listened to advice from Hillary about men then I don't feel sorry for her.

Every president we've had since the invention of talking pictures has been a statesman. That's what we've come to expect from even those who run for the office, much less attain it - persons of intellect and even temperament; mannerly, regardless of their political persuasion.

Trump, expensive Italian suits aside, is in every way the anti-statesman. The comb-over, the orange, the little hands always in motion, always making the "O" with the thumb and index finger (wtf?). Everything is bombast, everything reverts back to his favorite topic: himself. Everyone else is Lyin'-this, Little-that, Crooked-the other...and the guy is a gaffe-fest and barely cracks 20% on a truth-ometer. Two-thirds of the country thought he was unfit to hold the office BEFORE billybush-gate.

How Trump got to be be where he is is a mystery for the ages and will be debated long after we're all gone.

"but at the end of the day, the takeaway will be that the American people would just as soon have an asshat running the country than another career politician

and thats when they take notice and start trying to fix the country."

I can accept the idea of getting someone in there like Sanders or Perot or Ron Paul as a signal to the career politicians that we're pissed off and we're not going to take it anymore, b/c I believe that all of them were serious about governing and fixing shit with new ideas, whether they ended up working or not. I'd be willing to take that chance. But I don't believe that about Trump and I think the signal it will send if he gets elected is "we'll vote for anybody with broad name recognition who likes to sass." In theory I'm all for that, but in reality I just can't do it...

sardis wrote:I like the skinny ones.

Speak for yourself...

That has been my position for Trump all along. It is a total reset of the system. It forces both sides to evaluate what they are doing. If Hillary is elected it is the same "new world order".

And as far as Trump goes and the women that have been harassed by him. So let me get this straight. This cracka has been a billionaire for 30+years. So now is the time for women to come out and discuss their feelings and how they were hurt????????

Get the fuck out of here with that stuff.

Plain and simple, a vote for Hillary is for the same old politics and the problems that face America will continue all with the smiling faces that all is well and it is the Republicans who are holding them back from doing good. A vote for Trump blows up the system and forces both parties to start listening to people and not the other way around.

Plus watching that gaping pie hole grin is more than I think I could stand.

hedge wrote: I'd like to believe that there is some pure hearted statesman out there who is completely un-self-interested, but then you're talking about Peter Sellers's character Chauncy in Being There. But that's a movie, not reality...

I thought Sanders is a decent man...but his policies were too pie-in-the-sky for my taste. My personal fave, as I've said before, is Mike Bloomberg. I think he would have been a phenomenal president. I know he would never get elected because he's short, unemotional, quant-driven, nasally and anti-gun...but cotdam he would have had this country moving in the right direction on so many fronts. That little motherfucka is my dude.

sardis wrote:"I feel bad for Huma. She's always seemed to be a decent, intelligent, loyal and hardworking wonk."

And she's pretty hot in my book. I like the skinny ones.

Her bad luck was ending up with Weiner. I have the feeling he may have loaded up the laptop with her emails to use as leverage in the future. It's always the scumbags that bring things down.

Huma...in much the same vein as Amal Clooney and Caroline Issa...has that slender, dark-haired Mediterranean look that speaks to me. I do like them skinny...but they need to have some "pop" in the trunk. It's cultural. That's where Huma, Amal and Carol all fall a little short, for me.