Hillary's Interview

[HisArpy]

Did you get a little hard as you were pulling all of that out of your ass?

It wasn't speak vs. conceal. Conceal what? There was nothing there. It was speak vs. wait until we know what the fuck we're looking at - he didn't even wait for the search warrant. It becomes "conceal" when the people you're listening to give you bad information and share intelligence with one of the presidential campaigns before both the head of the FBI and congress.

OMG, seriously? Comey sent a letter to Congress as he said he would (and was required to do). SOMEONE IN CONGRESS leaked the letter to the press who picked it up and ran(ted) with it. So Comey didn't "speak" except as part of his official required duties.

From there; if there wasn't anything there there, then what's the problem? The fact that he (as required) informed Congress of his impending investigation into the laptop WITH a pending warrant for the search of that laptop? How is that somehow transmitted onto Trump? Because you WANT to believe that Guilliani knew something about it? My God, CONGRESS knew about it before it got leaked, what does some vague interdimensional conspiracy theory about Guillianni knowing about it before Comey was told anything have to do with that? Is it because you believe Trump's campaign KNEW? That somehow the potential bad guys were connected to the good guys? And, that somehow that connection makes the bad guys into the good guys and the good guy is now a bad guy? And if that's the case then why is the "new" good guy still a bad guy if he's the good guy now?

Honestly, your wacko theories are giving me a headache.

And Trump is and will continue failing because of his own incompetence and selfishness. Democrats have signalled again and again that if Trump wants to protect the popular parts of healthcare, spend on useful infrastructure and job creation and actually help the middle class, they will support him. What has he done? Failed at forcing through cruel legislation, signed a bunch of failed and meaningless executive orders, embarrassed us internationally, taken us nearly to the brink of armed conflict, attempted to change tax laws to benefit himself and his family, whom he's entrusted with critical government responsibilities despite a complete lack of experience

Wait, wait, you say Trump is failing because of his incompetence yet you admit the Democrats are signaling that UNLESS HE GIVES THEM WHAT THEY WANT they'll vote against any and all of his proposals? Are you SURE you want to say that? Because it seems to me (and the rest of the world) that it isn't Trump who's being the log jam here.

You deny it, of course, because you exist in lies now. They are the foundation of your reality.

I would suggest you stop this nonsense because logic and debate don't appear to be your strong suit. Vitriol and hate, yes. Logic, not so much.

 

[adrina]

...all you have to do is listen to these guys to see what they're about.

^^^ This.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Lol. Always promising when you start an interview with:

"Nope. I've spoken to no current FBI agents."

After being reminded he claimed the opposite on a radio show and trying to explain he was "mistaken":

"I have not, I have not spoken to a on-duty FBI agent, about anything, I guess for the last ten months, I dunno."

And I'm confused - is "it" supposed to refer to the advertising campaign, the push in Michigan, or the general ideological divide within the FBI?

"Did I hear about it? You're darn right I heard about it."

Halp!

But very great journalisming. You repeated an entire spin tour! You have sure shown me.



The Weiner investigation was federal. NYPD would have had nothing to do with it. You're embarrassing yourself. Go watch an adult breastfeeding video and take a nap.

Look, this is real simple.

I posted Jim Comey's testimony giving a perfectly rational answer to Diane Fienstein's question about WHY he wrote a letter to Congress advising it of additional facts related to the FBI's resumption of its investigation into Clinton's e-mail server in the days immediately preceding the election.

You came in riding on a high horse and short of facts to boldly state that, based on comments by Rudy Giuliani, the Trump campaign EITHER knew more about the FBI investigation prior to Comey's meeting with his staff on October 27 than Comey did, OR that Comey was lying to Congress in the letter he wrote on the 28th. That's the word YOU used. "Lying."

In fact, neither was true according to the very specific denials Giuliani told THREE different broadcast networks on the day he made the comments that you've cherry picked to support the shit-stained, baseless allegations you've made.

Now you either knew about those denials or you didn't.

If you knew about them, but pretended not to for the purpose of maligning both Comey AND Giuliani, then that basically makes YOU a LIAR.

If you honestly were not aware of Giuliani's denials to Matthews and Blitzer, then that just makes you the typical lazy-assed, wantonly negligent researcher of facts common to the internet in general and this forum in particular.

If on top of that ignorance, you are now going to further assume and allege that Giuliani's DENIALS about NOT communicating with actively employed FBI agents AND NOT KNOWING about the resumption of the investigation in advance of Comey's letter to Congress, are themselves LIES, and you are going to make that allegation based on no evidence whatsoever, then that just makes you a miserable little cunt.

For the record, I don't think YOU were lying.

So why not just go ahead and confirm what the rest of us already know and admit to the other two?

 

[Phelia]

OMG, seriously? Comey sent a letter to Congress as he said he would (and was required to do). SOMEONE IN CONGRESS leaked the letter to the press who picked it up and ran(ted) with it. So Comey didn't "speak" except as part of his official required duties.

From there; if there wasn't anything there there, then what's the problem? The fact that he (as required) informed Congress of his impending investigation into the laptop WITH a pending warrant for the search of that laptop? How is that somehow transmitted onto Trump? Because you WANT to believe that Guilliani knew something about it? My God, CONGRESS knew about it before it got leaked, what does some vague interdimensional conspiracy theory about Guillianni knowing about it before Comey was told anything have to do with that? Is it because you believe Trump's campaign KNEW? That somehow the potential bad guys were connected to the good guys? And, that somehow that connection makes the bad guys into the good guys and the good guy is now a bad guy? And if that's the case then why is the "new" good guy still a bad guy if he's the good guy now?

Honestly, your wacko theories are giving me a headache.



Wait, wait, you say Trump is failing because of his incompetence yet you admit the Democrats are signaling that UNLESS HE GIVES THEM WHAT THEY WANT they'll vote against any and all of his proposals? Are you SURE you want to say that? Because it seems to me (and the rest of the world) that it isn't Trump who's being the log jam here.



I would suggest you stop this nonsense because logic and debate don't appear to be your strong suit. Vitriol and hate, yes. Logic, not so much.

You're not even responding to anything I said anymore. The whole point is he wasn't fucking REQUIRED to do anything and is defending a subjective judgement call.

Or, failing to.

I'm going to leave you to throw punches at raindrops. You can join query for his nap.

Look, this is real simple.

I posted Jim Comey's testimony giving a perfectly rational answer to Diane Fienstein's question about WHY he wrote a letter to Congress advising it of additional facts related to the FBI's resumption of its investigation into Clinton's e-mail server in the days immediately preceding the election.

You came in riding on a high horse and short of facts to boldly state that, based on comments by Rudy Giuliani, the Trump campaign EITHER knew more about the FBI investigation prior to Comey's meeting with his staff on October 27 than Comey did, OR that Comey was lying to Congress in the letter he wrote on the 28th. That's the word YOU used. "Lying."

In fact, neither was true according to the very specific denials Giuliani told THREE different broadcast networks on the day he made the comments that you've cherry picked to support the shit-stained, baseless allegations you've made.

Now you either knew about those denials or you didn't.

If you knew about them, but pretended not to for the purpose of maligning both Comey AND Giuliani, then that basically makes YOU a LIAR.

If you honestly were not aware of Giuliani's denials to Matthews and Blitzer, then that just makes you the typical lazy-assed, wantonly negligent researcher of facts common to the internet in general and this forum in particular.

If on top of that ignorance, you are now going to further assume and allege that Giuliani's DENIALS about NOT communicating with actively employed FBI agents AND NOT KNOWING about the resumption of the investigation in advance of Comey's letter to Congress, are themselves LIES, and you are going to make that allegation based on no evidence whatsoever, then that just makes you a miserable little cunt.

For the record, I don't think YOU were lying.

So why not just go ahead and confirm what the rest of us already know and admit to the other two?

"Miserable little cunt." Lovely! Did you pick that one up from AJ?

You posted the video because you need to believe that Comey was completely justified. Anything else is a threat to your "Hillary is awful and brought everything she got on herself 100%" mythology.

Speak vs conceal is a well-rehearsed false dilemma, and it's either a lie or became true because of the threat of political pressure that people against Hillary would go public with it and accuse the FBI of impartiality. Actually, there is a third possibility: that Comey does not understand the nuances of metadata (I've read about odd gaps in his knowledge before) and was rail-roaded by a subordinate who was either equally ignorant or had an agenda. Either way, he made a terrible judgment call (in a series of questionable and precedent-breaking moves regarding this investigation in particular).

And the point you were avoiding in the first place: given the reports that Russians were behind the DNC email server hacking, he could have made an equally strong case for mentioning the investigation between Russia and members of Trump's campaign/transition team.

And yes, I think Rudy Giuliani was lying. Fucking listen to him. Take your ideological earplugs out.

Or keep yelling until you feel better. Nap crew is recruiting, I hear! Here, I'll do it for you:

"DID YOU EVEN WATCH HIS ANSWER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN, YOU STUPID BITCH?? HE FUCKING SAID HE HAD A GOOD REASON! GOD!!!!!! WHY WOULD HE SAY THAT IF HE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD REASON AHHHHHHHH" *froth froth froth froth*

 

[irksomesauce]

Phelinazi's partisan pos illogic stinks like Billary vag drippings.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

You're not even responding to anything I said anymore. The whole point is he wasn't fucking REQUIRED to do anything and is defending a subjective judgement call.

Or, failing to.

I'm going to leave you to throw punches at raindrops. You can join query for his nap.



"Miserable little cunt." Lovely! Did you pick that one up from AJ?

You posted the video because you need to believe that Comey was completely justified. Anything else is a threat to your "Hillary is awful and brought everything she got on herself 100%" mythology.

Speak vs conceal is a well-rehearsed false dilemma, and it's either a lie or became true because of the threat of political pressure that people against Hillary would go public with it and accuse the FBI of impartiality. Actually, there is a third possibility: that Comey does not understand the nuances of metadata (I've read about odd gaps in his knowledge before) and was rail-roaded by a subordinate who was either equally ignorant or had an agenda. Either way, he made a terrible judgment call (in a series of questionable and precedent-breaking moves regarding this investigation in particular).

And the point you were avoiding in the first place: given the reports that Russians were behind the DNC email server hacking, he could have made an equally strong case for mentioning the investigation between Russia and members of Trump's campaign/transition team.

And yes, I think Rudy Giuliani was lying. Fucking listen to him. Take your ideological earplugs out.

Or keep yelling until you feel better. Nap crew is recruiting, I hear! Here, I'll do it for you:

"DID YOU EVEN WATCH HIS ANSWER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN, YOU STUPID BITCH?? HE FUCKING SAID HE HAD A GOOD REASON! GOD!!!!!! WHY WOULD HE SAY THAT IF HE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD REASON AHHHHHHHH" *froth froth froth froth*

1. I have no "need" to feel that Comey was justified. It was simply that his explanation about what the metadata MIGHT have meant with respect to Clinton's criminal intent and the fact that it was relevant information to e-mails the FBI had tried and previously failed to get made it more than reasonable that he would approve continued investigation into the matter and inform Congress accordingly. Period. You've made no case whatsoever as to "speak vs. conceal" being a "FALSE dillema" or WHY that decision constitutes a terrible judgment call. Would you like to make that case supported by specific facts, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? I would listen to such a case with rapt attention if you care to make it, but until you do I am decidedly unimpressed by your undocumented assertions.

2. Not only am I not avoiding, but I am perfectly fine with the idea of the FBI investigating Russia's hacking into the DNC emails, AND MOST PARTICULARLY IF there was collusion with the Trump campaign or any American citizen regardless of political or campaign affiliation. Bring it on. "Lock THEM up" whoever "they" are if, in fact, "they" committed a criminal act.

3. I don't give a fuck who YOU or anyone else THINKS is lying. I care about the specific objective EVIDENCE that tends to PROVE someone is lying. That requires a standard other than just listening and entertaining one's bias. I'm happy to join your condemnation of Comey, Giuliani or anyone else as a liar when and IF you can show that they are lying about a specific issue. You don't make that case simply by showing that someone is in error about a fact, or has lied in the past, or has a particular motivation, or knows somebody whose cousin is a neighbor's mistress or whatever Leggo building blocks of innuendo you care to fashion.

You take each instance on its own merits and facts and you MAKE. THE. CASE.

Or you don't and you just blow smoke.

What I do know is that your earlier "evidence" of Giuliani's "self-admitted" prior knowledge of the "renewed" FBI investigation in late October was devoid of any acknowledgment or apparent awareness of Giuliani's specific denials. That doesn't exactly help your credibility in YOUR branding HIM as a LIAR.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Nate Silver begs to differ.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...-cost-clinton-the-election/?ex_cid=538twitter

I'm not a pundit and all I can speak to is my voting decision - as one of the target voters. I'm middle aged, educated and staunchly independent. The FBI's shenanigans had no influence on me whatsoever. I doubt it had any influence on the Trump voters or on the Hillary voters; their minds were made up months before.

For me, it came down to voting for the lesser of two evils and I found them equally distasteful. I voted for Johnson.

 

[Floridian]

http://www.truthcontrol.com/files/truthcontrol/images/111105032932_andy-rooney-640.jpg

"Who gives a fuck?"

- Andy Rooney

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I'm going to echo Johnny here, I could not bring myself to vote for either one (I too voted for Johnson), but this writer makes some good points about Hillary's Lament:

As a friend often says to me, “Television is character first and plot second.” You have to like who you invite into your home each week, way before you entertain the notion of what it is they might be saying. Whether fair or just, that’s reality. As another friend of mine long ago said to me: “Reality is something that doesn’t like to be ignored,” unless you are a politician, or Hillary Clinton, of course.

You and your supporters have continuously been dissecting your defeat in myriad ways in order to help yourselves sleep at night. Be it sexism, racism, misogyny, or James Comey. While you’re at it, why not throw in anti-Semitism? My cousin Solly, in Long Island, didn’t vote for you. I’m not even sure that makes any sense, but honestly neither do any of the other excuses. In the words of another friend, “An excuse is just an excuse.”

Blaming anyone but yourself and your own decisions and choices for your defeat is not only childish, it’s one of the biggest reasons for your loss. Is that any sort of lesson to teach our children? For years it’s always been someone else’s fault. First it was the right wing, and Fox News who came after your husband. Then it was the left wing that beat you in 2008. In 2016 it was the middle, “aka” the “deplorables.” I’m not a mathematician, but you have pretty much blamed everyone in America at some point or another.

Forget about the emails, or Benghazi, or calling millions of Americans deplorable. Forget about your treatment of the women your husband abused, the Russian reset, super predators, and your heroic tales of sniper fire. Wait, America didn’t forget, nor did you ever care. You always just assumed it was your legacy and your right to become president....

https://spectator.org/not-ready-for-primetime/

 

[NOIRTRASH]

1. I have no "need" to feel that Comey was justified. It was simply that his explanation about what the metadata MIGHT have meant with respect to Clinton's criminal intent and the fact that it was relevant information to e-mails the FBI had tried and previously failed to get made it more than reasonable that he would approve continued investigation into the matter and inform Congress accordingly. Period. You've made no case whatsoever as to "speak vs. conceal" being a "FALSE dillema" or WHY that decision constitutes a terrible judgment call. Would you like to make that case supported by specific facts, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? I would listen to such a case with rapt attention if you care to make it, but until you do I am decidedly unimpressed by your undocumented assertions.

2. Not only am I not avoiding, but I am perfectly fine with the idea of the FBI investigating Russia's hacking into the DNC emails, AND MOST PARTICULARLY IF there was collusion with the Trump campaign or any American citizen regardless of political or campaign affiliation. Bring it on. "Lock THEM up" whoever "they" are if, in fact, "they" committed a criminal act.

3. I don't give a fuck who YOU or anyone else THINKS is lying. I care about the specific objective EVIDENCE that tends to PROVE someone is lying. That requires a standard other than just listening and entertaining one's bias. I'm happy to join your condemnation of Comey, Giuliani or anyone else as a liar when and IF you can show that they are lying about a specific issue. You don't make that case simply by showing that someone is in error about a fact, or has lied in the past, or has a particular motivation, or knows somebody whose cousin is a neighbor's mistress or whatever Leggo building blocks of innuendo you care to fashion.

You take each instance on its own merits and facts and you MAKE. THE. CASE.

Or you don't and you just blow smoke.

What I do know is that your earlier "evidence" of Giuliani's "self-admitted" prior knowledge of the "renewed" FBI investigation in late October was devoid of any acknowledgment or apparent awareness of Giuliani's specific denials. That doesn't exactly help your credibility in YOUR branding HIM as a LIAR.

I hadda career with government and THE LAW BE DAMNED is the prevailing attitude applied to VIPs. If the transgressor is a bottom feeder the law doesn't save them. Lincoln said it long ago: IF THE END COMES OUT OKAY THE LAW DOESNT MATTER, IF THE END COMES OUT BAD GOD AND THE LAW CANT SAVE YOU.

 

[HisArpy]

You're not even responding to anything I said anymore...

You aren't actually saying anything any more. If you ever really did.

What you've done here is rant on about the unfairness of it all and, like your compatriots, you are STILL trying to find someone else to blame.

First it was Russian interference. Then it was fake news. Then it was a recount because of voter fraud. Then it was Trump being an evil misogynist. Then it was Fox news. Then it was the deplorables and the white supremacists. Then it was the popular vote. Now it's Comey.

Isn't it interesting that if it actually WAS any of those things we'd probably know it by now...

 

[Conager]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...-voters-in-the-midwest-with-econ-anxiety.html

Occam's razor applies here. All of the things that didn't happen that Hisarpy mentions above are distractions.

The article above (selected as more palatable to the Hilary or die fans) is actually a good analysis of what happened based on political scientists, pollsters, and statisticians looking at the numbers about who voted and why. They are quoyung the much more wonkish McClatchy:

Obama-Trump voters … effectively accounted for more than two-thirds of the reason Clinton lost, according to Matt Canter, a senior vice president of the Democratic political firm Global Strategy Group. In his group’s analysis, about 70 percent of Clinton’s failure to reach Obama’s vote total in 2012 was because she lost these voters … His firm’s conclusion is shared broadly by other Democrats who have examined the data, including senior members of Clinton’s campaign and officials at the Democratic data and analytics firm Catalist.

McClatchy goes on to explain the economic drivers but it comes down to "are you better off now than you were four years ago?" except in this case these voters and economically depressed areas are looking at 10 years, with Hiilary being offered ss a continuity candidate.

...and as David Axelrod said call me did not tell Hillary not to campaign in Wisconsin. The Hillary campaign knew that they were weak with Independence in Wisconsin but assumed that if she got her shrill face out there she would be likely to do more harm than good since there are no good answers for her team as to why the recovery has been so anemic. They bet on those that had voted Democratic in the past for Obama showing up and voting for her out of some kind of habit. They bet wrong and lost.

No one needed Comey to reveal what Hillary's character is like. Everyone knows all about that. You either excuse Hillary's character or don't. Bill's clumsy effort to get Lynch to whitewash the latest in a string of unsavory incidents wad the one and only thing tbat thrust Comey onto the horns of a dilemna. That is all on team Clinton.

 

[water505]

You aren't actually saying anything any more. If you ever really did.

What you've done here is rant on about the unfairness of it all and, like your compatriots, you are STILL trying to find someone else to blame.

First it was Russian interference. Then it was fake news. Then it was a recount because of voter fraud. Then it was Trump being an evil misogynist. Then it was Fox news. Then it was the deplorables and the white supremacists. Then it was the popular vote. Now it's Comey.

Isn't it interesting that if it actually WAS any of those things we'd probably know it by now...

It's what leftists do. Never accept personal responsibility and blame others who had nothing to do with it.

They haven't picked up on the fact that they're constantly lying and enabling each other.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

What I do know is that your earlier "evidence" of Giuliani's "self-admitted" prior knowledge of the "renewed" FBI investigation in late October was devoid of any acknowledgment or apparent awareness of Giuliani's specific denials. That doesn't exactly help your credibility in YOUR branding HIM as a LIAR.

And if you're still out there, Phellatio, and still wish to pursue this witch hunt of Giuliani "The Liar" perhaps you could give us a rational reason WHY he TWICE DENIED on the afternoon and evening of November 4, 2016 HAVING THE SAME INFORMATION about the expanded FBI investigation THAT, ACCORDING TO YOU, HE BRAGGED ABOUT HAVING that very morning on Fox News.

People don't typically lie without a motivation. So what happened? Did the former U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York suddenly realize that he had violated the law? Was he so stupid that it slipped his mind that bragging about having leaked confidential knowledge of a criminal investigation could actually get his buddies Trump or Comey in trouble?

In the unlikely event you actually condescend to attempt to PROVE Giuliani LIED about NOT having the knowledge he had only hours ago claimed to have, kindly complete the picture for us and give us a credible explanation for how that staggering change in mindset came about.

 

[Wrong Element]

I'm not a pundit and all I can speak to is my voting decision - as one of the target voters. I'm middle aged, educated and staunchly independent. The FBI's shenanigans had no influence on me whatsoever. I doubt it had any influence on the Trump voters or on the Hillary voters; their minds were made up months before.

For me, it came down to voting for the lesser of two evils and I found them equally distasteful. I voted for Johnson.

Silver's point, though, is that a lot of people, more than usual, did NOT have their minds made up until the last minute.

His case is very persuasive, though I can see why a lot of people, particularly Comey and the American news media, want to pretend otherwise.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Silver's point, though, is that a lot of people, more than usual, did NOT have their minds made up until the last minute.

His case is very persuasive, though I can see why a lot of people, particularly Comey and the American news media, want to pretend otherwise.

Silver makes no attempt to parse the effect of the Comey letter with the MOST OBVIOUS CONCURRENT EFFECT of Trump's last minutes push into Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Hello?

Not to mention, once again, Comey's equally prominent ABSOLUTION of Clinton wrongdoing on the eve of the election itself. There is no credible explanation for one Comey statement being a bombshell that immediately plummets Clinton's poll numbers and the second statement, equally well covered in the media, that has NO beneficial effect whatsoever.

It's a bullshit conclusion when ALL the relevant facts are objectively examined.

 

[SilverBass]

Boy... I watched that train wreck. She just doesn't get it. The reason she lost was not because of Russia, or because of the FBI torpedoing her, or because Trump was better. She lost because she's an awful human being and was a terrible nominee.

I liked her interview. Hillary is very well spoken and quite competent. I understand why some people just don't like her, but even more don't like Trump for much more obvious reasons. One thing I give the Republicans credit for is that they did a really good job in vilifying Hillary, so I can see why so many were turned off on her. And really the reason she was not elected was definitely influenced by Russia and Comey. That is not to say without those issues she would have won, but they contributed to some votes turning away from her. And of course Hillary herself was also to blame, of course. Keep in mind, STILL, she received three million more votes than Trump, and while that does matter with the electoral system, it still says that quite a few more Americans preferred her to be our new president.

Personally I favored Hillary quite a bit over Trump, but I am not some huge supporter of hers so really I am not trying to come to her defense, but rather just trying to be objective about the whole thing.

 

[Conager]

Silver makes no attempt to parse the effect of the Comey letter with the MOST OBVIOUS CONCURRENT EFFECT of Trump's last minutes push into Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Hello?

Not to mention, once again, Comey's equally prominent ABSOLUTION of Clinton wrongdoing on the eve of the election itself. There is no credible explanation for one Comey statement being a bombshell that immediately plummets Clinton's poll numbers and the second statement, equally well covered in the media, that has NO beneficial effect whatsoever.

It's a bullshit conclusion when ALL the relevant facts are objectively examined.

The Russians may have beamed disrupter rays into American homes right as Comey was, once again, letting Hilary off the hook for actual crimed, so you cannot count on them having heard about that.

You also cannot rely on voters that had previously voted for Obama flipping for Trump because, "It's the economy, stupid!" Because those exhaustively polled voters are only saying that to cover their racism and mysogyny.

 

[Disgustipated]

The Russians may have beamed disrupter rays into American homes right as Comey was, once again, letting Hilary off the hook for actual crimed, so you cannot count on them having heard about that.

You also cannot rely on voters that had previously voted for Obama flipping for Trump because, "It's the economy, stupid!" Because those exhaustively polled voters are only saying that to cover their racism and mysogyny.

Can you provide the number of voters polled and then the percentage of those that were covering their racism and misogyny? No? Ok, good.

 

[Conager]

Can you provide the number of voters polled and then the percentage of those that were covering their racism and misogyny? No? Ok, good.

this information is as a result of the autopsy of the Clinton defeat. I've referenced it several times if you care to look. The Democrats spared no expense trying to figure out exactly what went wrong. They performed one of the most exhaustive analysis of who voted where and why that has ever been done after a presidential election. The conclusions of those reports are not what's being sad by those still pushing the excuses they were given immediately post election.

 

[PurpleSatin]

Hillary is just not a very likeable person. The only thing she agreed on Trump with was bombing Syria. She's a war-mongering A-hole. If she had won we'd already be in WW3 probably

 

[Disgustipated]

this information is as a result of the autopsy of the Clinton defeat. I've referenced it several times if you care to look. The Democrats spared no expense trying to figure out exactly what went wrong. They performed one of the most exhaustive analysis of who voted where and why that has ever been done after a presidential election. The conclusions of those reports are not what's being sad by those still pushing the excuses they were given immediately post election.

I'm sorry I broke my own rule of not expecting anything of substance from you.

 

[Conager]

I'm sorry I broke my own rule of not expecting anything of substance from you.

Too funny.

QFI

 

[Phelia]

1. I have no "need" to feel that Comey was justified. It was simply that his explanation about what the metadata MIGHT have meant with respect to Clinton's criminal intent and the fact that it was relevant information to e-mails the FBI had tried and previously failed to get made it more than reasonable that he would approve continued investigation into the matter and inform Congress accordingly. Period. You've made no case whatsoever as to "speak vs. conceal" being a "FALSE dillema" or WHY that decision constitutes a terrible judgment call. Would you like to make that case supported by specific facts, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? I would listen to such a case with rapt attention if you care to make it, but until you do I am decidedly unimpressed by your undocumented assertions.

2. Not only am I not avoiding, but I am perfectly fine with the idea of the FBI investigating Russia's hacking into the DNC emails, AND MOST PARTICULARLY IF there was collusion with the Trump campaign or any American citizen regardless of political or campaign affiliation. Bring it on. "Lock THEM up" whoever "they" are if, in fact, "they" committed a criminal act.

3. I don't give a fuck who YOU or anyone else THINKS is lying. I care about the specific objective EVIDENCE that tends to PROVE someone is lying. That requires a standard other than just listening and entertaining one's bias. I'm happy to join your condemnation of Comey, Giuliani or anyone else as a liar when and IF you can show that they are lying about a specific issue. You don't make that case simply by showing that someone is in error about a fact, or has lied in the past, or has a particular motivation, or knows somebody whose cousin is a neighbor's mistress or whatever Leggo building blocks of innuendo you care to fashion.

You take each instance on its own merits and facts and you MAKE. THE. CASE.

Or you don't and you just blow smoke.

What I do know is that your earlier "evidence" of Giuliani's "self-admitted" prior knowledge of the "renewed" FBI investigation in late October was devoid of any acknowledgment or apparent awareness of Giuliani's specific denials. That doesn't exactly help your credibility in YOUR branding HIM as a LIAR.

It is a false dilemma because despite what he claims there was obviously the option of taking some time to look at what was there or get a proper estimate of how long it would take to do so. It took them a week to finish! Why did the fucking FBI director think it would have been "catastrophic" to assess the fucking evidence before writing to Congress, which he knew damn well would be instantly public and could affect the election.

Look: I know it's a complicated story. There's lots of blame to go around. Anthony Weiner, first of all, for being a monster. And the justice department was probably a really fucked up place to be. The Loretta-Bill meeting was dumb! The Republicans had made the whole thing a witchhunt! And Huma and Hillary, obviously!! It was all stupid and everyone's an asshole and now we have a complete maniac in charge but for fuck's sake we should be able to agree that he shouldn't have written the goddamn letter OR should have disclosed the Trump campaign/Russia investigation.

I'm not a pundit and all I can speak to is my voting decision - as one of the target voters. I'm middle aged, educated and staunchly independent. The FBI's shenanigans had no influence on me whatsoever. I doubt it had any influence on the Trump voters or on the Hillary voters; their minds were made up months before.

For me, it came down to voting for the lesser of two evils and I found them equally distasteful. I voted for Johnson.

Don't be a ding dong. Read the article! There are some interesting dimensions to consider. This crazy destructive certainty. I wonder if it happened in Brexit. I hope it doesn't happen in France

Anyway, I just wonder what the next one's going to look like. I feel like we're going to have more businesspeople in the mix. Maybe Silicon Valley will stage a coup. Our new constitution will be 140 characters or less!

blah blah blah blah blah blah

Zzzzzzzzzz

And if you're still out there, Phellatio, and still wish to pursue this witch hunt of Giuliani "The Liar" perhaps you could give us a rational reason WHY he TWICE DENIED on the afternoon and evening of November 4, 2016 HAVING THE SAME INFORMATION about the expanded FBI investigation THAT, ACCORDING TO YOU, HE BRAGGED ABOUT HAVING that very morning on Fox News.

People don't typically lie without a motivation. So what happened? Did the former U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York suddenly realize that he had violated the law? Was he so stupid that it slipped his mind that bragging about having leaked confidential knowledge of a criminal investigation could actually get his buddies Trump or Comey in trouble?

In the unlikely event you actually condescend to attempt to PROVE Giuliani LIED about NOT having the knowledge he had only hours ago claimed to have, kindly complete the picture for us and give us a credible explanation for how that staggering change in mindset came about.

Uh, yeah. That's what happened. His pattern of dishonesty and erratic behavior was a hallmark of this campaign. I'm sorry you weren't paying attention. Look it up yourself.

Oh, and then there's, you know, this: The FBI is investigating whether Rudy Giuliani leaked information about Hillary Clinton’s emails.


But you should call them and tell them he denied it TWO WHOLE TIMES on TELEVISION! Make sure to include some eyeroll emojis.

Silver makes no attempt to parse the effect of the Comey letter with the MOST OBVIOUS CONCURRENT EFFECT of Trump's last minutes push into Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Hello?

Not to mention, once again, Comey's equally prominent ABSOLUTION of Clinton wrongdoing on the eve of the election itself. There is no credible explanation for one Comey statement being a bombshell that immediately plummets Clinton's poll numbers and the second statement, equally well covered in the media, that has NO beneficial effect whatsoever.

It's a bullshit conclusion when ALL the relevant facts are objectively examined.

I'M RIGHT BECAUSE I'M YELLING WHO NEEDS MATH WHEN YOU HAVE YELLING

 

[Ms_Ann]

Bill: What did you do today honey?

Hillary: I spend the entire day writing a rebuttal to a post on a porn site.