The Drip Drip Drip...

[Burning Petard]

It was in all the papers.

Gee. I guess that makes it as authoritative as "I read it in Wikipedia."

snailgate.

[Lord Jim]

SG, are you disputing that Hillary used a private email system for her official government business?

Please tell me that isn't so...

[Gob]

5 ways Hillary could lose the election.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Only 5?

[Econoline]

source (Rebecca Shabad on Twitter)

source (PDF of the entire email)

[Lord Jim]

I was going to make the same basic point, but this guy saved me the key strokes:

Colin Powell’s Outrageous Behavior Is Not a Clinton Defense

Ross Kaminsky

Liberals are gleefully parading around what purports to be an e-mail from former Secretary of State Colin Powell to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (At least we think this was sent while she was in office, or else very shortly before taking office.) In it, Powell basically cops to violation of both government policy and perhaps the same law regarding the handling of confidential information that we know Hillary has violated.

The main thing to remember is that Powell was not Clinton’s boss, professor, mentor, or instruction-giver, and that his intentional misbehavior does not give sanction to hers. It simply cannot be used (credibly) to defend Mrs. Clinton. To use a bad analogy, this is the high-ranking gov’t official version of “If your brother said to jump off a bridge, would you do it?”

Also, Powell did not set up a private server the way Clinton did. However, I have to say that his implication in this note is that he intentionally aimed to prevent his own communications from becoming “official record and subject to the law” even though that is the default (and really only) standard for e-mails to or from the secretary of state that have even marginal connection to his/her work as a government official. To me, Powell’s note is tantamount to admission of a crime and Hillary’s reaction was that she thought that particular crime seemed like a fine idea.

http://spectator.org/colin-powells-outr ... n-defense/

Of course charging Powell with anything becomes extremely problematic with Hillary having beaten the rap....

[Big RR]

And if he was charged (after the white woman got away with it), can you imagine the Black Lives Matter riots?

[Econoline]

Don't worry. He's a Republican--he was never even investigated, and never will be. (And of course he's not a woman...let alone a Clinton woman! )

[Lord Jim]

Don't worry. He's a Republican--

Good point...

BLM wouldn't lift a finger for him...

[BoSoxGal]

Does anyone else remember why Colin Powell, undisputed hero of the first Gulf War, ultimately decided not to run for president?

As I recall, it had a fair bit to do with his wife's fear he would be assassinated. For being black.

[Burning Petard]

More smoke, made via theatrical generator with no fire involved.

Hillary made a comment at a fundraiser in NYC, about the Donald supporters, on camera with reporters present. This is the second time in about a week that she has publicly said that about half of those supporters are racists or bigots or hopelessly ignorant. I have been listening for more than two hours of CNN talking heads declaiming about how awful it is that she would say such a thing. Perhaps it is true, but it should be political suicide to actually say it with reporters present. An insult to all Americans. It is such a painful example of East coast liberal elitism.

More than two hours. Still going on while I do chores in the kitchen, and straighten up the apartment. Closer to three hours now.

NONE of them, even the token Dem talking heads to show 'balance' has said anything about what Hillary said about the other half of the Donald's supporters. She said the other half was made up of people the Democratic party has long ignored and who have legitimate complaints about the federal government--that she wanted to work for them.

But of course, that part of the statement is ignored.

snailgate

[rubato]

Colin Powell’s Outrageous Behavior Is Not a Clinton Defense

It only became "outrageous" when they needed something, anything, however minor, to harp about, weak after weak.


When Colin did it it was the minor faux pas it still was for Clinton. If they were morally consistent and smarter than flatworms whey would be calling for his indictment twice a day. But they know the mental standard their voters will accept and they play to that instead.


yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

She must have met wes....

US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has apologised for calling half of Donald Trump's supporters "deplorable" people.

But the Democrat launched a furious attack on her Republican opponent and promised to keep fighting "bigotry and racist rhetoric".

Mr Trump had responded by saying the comment was "insulting" to "millions of amazing, hard working people".

Opinion polls suggest Mr Trump is gaining on Mrs Clinton.

The rivals are neck and neck in the key battleground states of Ohio and Florida.

ETA:

Trump stops Bill's drip...

[wesw]

well, gob, that comment cost her the election.

....and all of the astute observers of American politics realize it. her supporters (jim, guin) won t admit it, of course, because they have resigned themselves to dishonesty, but they know it.

the fact that she is stroking out in public just puts the final nails in her political coffin, she had already lost .

half of us are deplorable, the half of us are stupid, according to Clinton....

....it couldn t be that we are just sick of the corruption of the elitist establishment, could it?

nah, we (italics) are just deplorable and/or stupid..., yeah..., that s the ticket....

I hope that Biden has his campaigning shoes ready, he s gonna need them.....

[Burning Petard]

Read what she actually said about each half of Trump supporters. The second basket has been ignored all weekend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/12/opini ... ables.html

I hope west you are in this second basket. (later addendum: I intended to type 'wesw" and autocorrect hit me.)

snailgate.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Not that LJ needs defending, but from what I have read of in LJ's posts, he is NOT a Hillary supporter. Voting for someone does not always translate to supporting that person. Sometimes it's just the lesser of two evils, this election especially.

[Big RR]

....it couldn t be that we are just sick of the corruption of the elitist establishment, could it?

wes--you're disgusted by corruption and elitism--good. Seek a candidate that represents you. But Trump? Please.

it reminds me of when Mike Tyson fired his long term management team because he said they were stealing his money and hired Don King; he found out what having his money stolen was when he hooked up with King. And you'll find out more about elitism and corruption with Trump than you every would with Hillary.

[wesw]

oldr, with all due respect, I must disagree.

jim s vote is support.

jim s constant and distorted denigration of her only real opponent IS active support for her.

if jim penciled in Kasich as a write in vote instead of voting for dirty Hillary, I would agree with you, but as it stands I must regretfully disagree with you.

an unusual position for me..... (insert joke here)

[oldr_n_wsr]

but as it stands I must regretfully disagree with you.

Don't regret disagreeing with me. If we all agreed the world would be very dull indeed.

Both candidates are far from "ideal". No candidate is ever "ideal". LJ has not given praise to either and has pointed out many of Hillary Clintons faults.
To me it's not "support".
Your mileage may vary.

[Lord Jim]

Not that LJ needs defending, but from what I have read of in LJ's posts, he is NOT a Hillary supporter. Voting for someone does not always translate to supporting that person. Sometimes it's just the lesser of two evils, this election especially.

She's lied about lieing.
Too many things point to impropriety at the very least, conflict of interest and influence peddling at the middle and you can fill in the blank for the worst.

Are these two candidates the best the "major" parties can do?

Apparently in this election cycle...

Now compare that to Trump who has probably made at least three outrageous, inaccurate, or patently false statements already today, and it's not even lunch time.

And that's why I'm voting for Hillary...

She's an arrogant, cynical, lying, pocket-lining weasel...

But at least she's not a complete sociopath....

Unlike her opponent....

"Vote For Hillary...At least she's not a sociopath!"

Now there's a bumper sticker I could put on my car...

Yeah there's a ringing endorsement if ever I saw one...

I'm sure Team Clinton would love to sign me up as a surrogate speaker...