One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Last Nights Debate: Did Anyone Pick Up On This?
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Oct 11, 2016 06:40:21   #
Richard94611
 
You must work for the Trump campaign and be taking your cues from the Boss.

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 06:41:01   #
Richard94611
 
Richard94611 wrote:
You must work for the Trump campaign and be taking your cues from the Boss.


Of interest to all you fascists:



U.S.GEORGE W. BUSHEMAILHILLARY CLINTON EMAIL
For 18 months, Republican strategists, political pundits, reporters and Americans who follow them have been pursuing Hillary Clinton’s personal email habits, and no evidence of a crime has been found. But now they at least have the skills and interest to focus on a much larger and deeper email conspiracy, one involving war, lies, a private server run by the Republican Party and contempt of Congress citations—all of it still unsolved and unpunished.

Clinton’s email habits look positively transparent when compared with the subpoena-dodging, email-hiding, private-server-using George W. Bush administration. Between 2003 and 2009, the Bush White House “lost” 22 million emails. This correspondence included millions of emails written during the darkest period in America’s recent history, when the Bush administration was ginning up support for what turned out to be a disastrous war in Iraq with false claims that the country possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and, later, when it was firing U.S. attorneys for political reasons. Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week Like Clinton, the Bush White House used a private email server—its was owned by the Republican National Committee. And the Bush administration failed to store its emails, as required by law, and then refused to comply with a congressional subpoena seeking some of those emails. “It’s about as amazing a double standard as you can get,” says Eric Boehlert, who works with the pro-Clinton group Media Matters. “If you look at the Bush emails, he was a sitting president, and 95 percent of his chief advisers’ emails were on a private email system set up by the RNC. Imagine if for the last year and a half we had been talking about Hillary Clinton’s emails set up on a private DNC server?”
09_23_BushEmails_01
President Bush and Former American Vice President Dick Cheney in the Presidential Limousine.
SMITH COLLECTION/GADO/GETTY

Most troubling, researchers found a suspicious pattern in the White House email system blackouts, including periods when there were no emails available from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney. “That the vice president’s office, widely characterized as the most powerful vice president in history, should have no archived emails in its accounts for scores of days—especially days when there was discussion of whether to invade Iraq—beggared the imagination,” says Thomas Blanton, director of the Washington-based National Security Archive. The NSA (not to be confused with the National Security Agency, the federal surveillance organization) is a nonprofit devoted to obtaining and declassifying national security documents and is one of the key players in the effort to recover the supposedly lost Bush White House emails.The media paid some attention to the Bush email chicanery but spent considerably less ink and airtime than has been devoted to Clinton’s digital communications in the past 18 months. According to the Boston social media analytics firm Crimson Hexagon, which ran a study for Newsweek, there have been 560,397 articles mentioning Clinton’s emails between March 2015 and September 1, 2016.

In 1978, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which mandated that all presidential and vice presidential records created after January 20, 1981, be preserved and that the public, not the president, owned the records. The following year, the Reagan administration installed the White House’s rudimentary first email system.Despite the PRA, neither the Reagan nor the George H.W. Bush administration maintained email records, even as the number of White House emails began growing exponentially. (The Bush administration would produce around 200 million.) In 1989, a federal lawsuit to force the White House to comply with the PRA was filed by several groups, including the National Security Archive, which at the time was mostly interested in unearthing the secret history of the Cold War. The suit sparked a last-minute court order, issued in the waning hours of the first Bush presidency, that prevented 6,000 White House email backup tapes from being erased.When Bill Clinton moved into the White House, his lawyers supported the elder Bush in his effort to uphold a side deal he’d cut with the National Archives and Records Administration to allow him to treat his White House emails as personal. At the time, George Stephanopoulos—then the White House communications director—defended the resistance, saying his boss, like Bush, didn't want subsequent, and potentially unfriendly, administrations rooting around in old emails.

The Clinton White House eventually settled the suit, and White House aide John Podesta—now Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman—even invited members of the National Security Archive into the White House to demonstrate how the new system worked. If anyone tried to delete an email, a message would pop up on screen indicating that to do so would be in violation of the PRA.“We were happy with that,” recalls Blanton, who edited a book on the Reagan-Bush email evasion, White House E-Mail: The Top Secret Messages the Reagan/Bush White House Tried to Destroy.Eight years later, in 2003, a whistleblower told the National Security Archive that the George W. Bush White House was no longer saving its emails. The Archive and another watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (which had represented outed CIA agent Valerie Plame in her case against the Bush administration), refiled their original lawsuit.The plaintiffs soon discovered that Bush aides had simply shut down the Clinton automatic email archive, and they identified the start date of the lost emails as January 1, 2003. The White House claimed it had switched to a new server and in the process was unable to maintain an archive—a claim that many found dubious.Bush administration emails could have aided a special prosecutor’s investigation into a White House effort to discredit a diplomat who disagreed with the administration’s fabricated Iraq WMD evidence by outing his CIA agent wife, Plame. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who was brought in to investigate that case, said in 2006 that he believed some potentially relevant emails sent by aides in Cheney's office were in the administration's system but he couldn’t get them.
09_09_bush_emails_05
Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney listens as former President George W. Bush makes remarks about the U.S. defense budget after meeting with military leaders at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., November 29, 2007.
LARRY DOWNING/REUTERS
The supposedly lost emails also prevented Congress from fully investigating, in 2007, the politically motivated firing of nine U.S. attorneys. When the Democrat-led Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed related emails, Bush’s attorney general, Alberto Gonzalez, said many were inaccessible or lost on a nongovernmental private server run by the RNC and called gwb43.com. The White House, meanwhile, officially refused to comply with the congressional subpoena.Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) called the president’s actions “Nixonian stonewalling” and at one point took to the floor in exasperation and shouted, “They say they have not been preserved. I don't believe that!” His House counterpart, Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), said Bush's assertion of executive privilege was unprecedented and displayed “an appalling disregard for the right of the people to know what is going on in their government.”In court in May 2008, administration lawyers contended that the White House had lost three months’ worth of email backups from the initial days of the Iraq War. Bush aides thus evaded a court-ordered deadline to describe the contents of digital backup believed to contain emails deleted in 2003 between March—when the U.S. invaded Iraq—and September. They also refused to give the NSA nonprofit any emails relating to the Iraq War, despite the PRA, blaming a system upgrade that had deleted up to 5 million emails. The plaintiffs eventually contended that the Bush administration knew about the problem in 2005 but did nothing to fix it.Eventually, the Bush White House admitted it had lost 22 million emails, not 5 million. Then, in December 2009—well into Barack Obama’s administration—the White House said it found 22 million emails, dated between 2003 and 2005, that it claimed had been mislabeled. That cache was given to the National Archives, and it and other plaintiffs agreed, on December 14, 2009, to settle their lawsuit. But the emails have not yet been made available to the public.The Senate Judiciary Committee was operating on a different track but having no more luck. In a bipartisan vote in 2008, the committee found White House aides Karl Rove and Joshua Bolten in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with subpoenas in the investigation of the fired U.S. attorneys. The penalties for contempt are fines and possible jail time, but no punishment was ever handed down because a D.C. federal appeals court stayed the Senate’s ruling in October 2008, while the White House appealed. Rove’s lawyer claimed Rove did not “intentionally delete” any emails but was only conducting “the type of routine deletions people make to keep their inboxes orderly,” according to the Associated Press.By then, Obama was weeks away from winning the election, so the Bush administration basically ran out the clock. And neither the Obama administration nor the Senate committee pursued the matter.The committee’s final report on the matter was blunt: “[T]his subversion of the justice system has included lying, misleading, stonewalling and ignoring the Congress in our attempts to find out precisely what happened. The reasons given for these firings were contrived as part of a cover-up, and the stonewalling by the White House is part and parcel of that same effort.”At the time, some journalists and editorialists complained about a lack of transparency on the White House’s part, but The Washington Post, in an editorial, accepted the White House explanation that the emails could have been lost due to flawed IT systems.The mystery of what was in the missing Bush emails and why they went missing is still years away from being solved—if ever. The National Archives now has 220 million emails from the Bush White House, and there is a long backlog of Freedom of Information Act requests already. But not all of the emails will be available to the public until 2021, when the presidential security restrictions elapse. Even then, with currently available archiving and sorting methods, researchers still have years of work to figure out whether Cheney deleted days’ worth of emails around the time of the WMD propaganda campaign that led to war, Blanton says.“To your question of what’s in there—we don't know,” he says. “There was not a commitment at the top for saving it all. Now was that resistance motivated by political reasons? Or was it ‘We gotta save money’?”
09_12_bush_emails_02
Former U.S. President George W. Bush winks to a member of the audience before he delivers the final State of the Union address of his presidency at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., January 28, 2008.
TIM SLOAN/REUTERS
Like Leahy, Blanton has doubts that the emails were ever truly “lost,” given that every email exists in two places, with the sender and with the recipient. But unlike watchdog group Judicial Watch, which has been relentless about forcing the State Department to publicly release Hillary Clinton’s emails, Blanton and his fellow researchers have decided not to press their fight for the release of the Bush emails.Blanton says he has no idea whether the Bush email record will be found intact after 2021, when his group will be allowed to do a systematic search and recovery process in the National Archives. “Did they find all of them? We don't know,” he says. “Our hope is that by that time, the government and the National Archives will have much better technology and tools with which to sift and sort that kind of volume.”Blanton says he’s not expecting that kind of upgrade, though. “Their entire budget is less than the cost of a single Marine One helicopter,” he says. “It’s an underfunded orphan.”Meanwhile, the episode has been nearly forgotten by almost everyone but the litigants. A source involved with the stymied congressional investigation recalled the period as “an intense time,” but the Obama administration didn’t encourage any follow-up, devoting its political capital to dealing with the crashing economy rather than investigating the murky doings that took place under his predecessor. Since then, no major media outlet has devoted significant—or, really, any—resources to obtaining the emails, or to finding out what was in them, or what, exactly, the Bush administration was hiding (or losing).

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 06:50:02   #
pftspd
 
Who cares? I don't. Get real, idiot. This country is over. What remains is a delusion. A joke. YOU have no say-so about anything.. Your opinion means nothing, not crap. Who cares what you say, what you "think"? It matters not. You are just another stupid, blind, follower, just another of the millions of American morons, idiots, whose blabber is good for about only one thing; flushing fecal matter and urine down the drain. That's it, Bozo. This is TRUE. You are a moron, and idiot, for thinking that your insipid opinion means crap. Open you stupid eyes, Moron. Face reality.. You are STUPID.

Reply
 
 
Oct 11, 2016 07:48:21   #
Sassy Lass
 
JMHO wrote:
I thought Hillary made a real telling and dangerous statement when she was explaining what she was looking for in a SCOTUS nominee. She stated that she wanted a SCOTUS to get rid of 'Citizens United'! To me that would mean the destruction of the First Amendment for any conservative organization...the same type of discrimination the IRS uses against conservative orgs. If it wasn't for Citizens United Hillary's illegal private unsecured email server would not be known. Citizens United is all about transparency in government and holding office holders responsible for their actions, going after both sides. Leftists don't like Citizens United because it exposes their hypocrisy and corruption.
I thought Hillary made a real telling and dangerou... (show quote)


YES...YES...YES! This is what many of us on the Right have been screaming for months. This next president could have up.to FOUR new picks for the Supreme Court. This means loss of freedom of speech, loss of freedom of religion, loss of our second amendment rights, loss of our American Constiturion, and God knows what else. Are you scared yet? If not, you should be terrified.

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 08:19:21   #
pftspd
 
YUP.. and you can kiss SCOTUS bye. ONE FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL.. Clinton will change, and thus destroy, THIS NATION. AND who is responsible for this? Amerca's women.. STUPID women. THAT INESCAPLE vagina. A garbage hole!

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 08:33:09   #
Sassy Lass
 
Puh....leese! Don't paint all women with the same brush! There are many enlightened women out here who are sick at what's happening to our country and way of life. We just can't overcome the voters of stupid who live on the government dole. We should be doing something about these politicians who use our hard earned money to "buy" votes and stay in power.

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 09:27:29   #
S. Maturin
 
pftspd wrote:
MATURIN.. YOU ARE TOTALLY CORRECT!!!!


Thank you...I know that this nation contains far more rational, intelligent beings who do agree with you and me than the flaming 'pop-off' morons who are glued to Hillary and her massive money machine.!


Reply
 
 
Oct 11, 2016 10:31:04   #
jer48 Loc: perris ca
 
Richard94611 wrote:
Dear Times Reader,

He lied about a sex tape.
He lied about his lies about ‘birtherism.’
He lied about the growth rate of the American economy.
He lied about the state of the job market.
He lied about the trade deficit.
He lied about tax rates.
He lied about his own position on the Iraq War, again.
He lied about ISIS.
He lied about the Benghazi attack.
He lied about the war in Syria.
He lied about Syrian refugees.
He lied about Russia’s hacking.
He lied about the San Bernardino terrorist attack.
He lied about Hillary Clinton’s tax plan.
He lied about her health care plan.
He lied about her immigration plan.
He lied about her email deletion.
He lied about Obamacare, more than once.
He lied about the rape of a 12-year-old girl.
He lied about his history of groping women without their consent.
Finally, he broke with basic democratic norms and called on his political opponent to be jailed — because, in large part, of what he described as her dishonesty.
This is the second time I’ve summarized a presidential debate by listing Donald Trump’s untruths, and there’s a reason. The country has never had a presidential candidate who lies the way that he does – relentlessly.
Yes, virtually every politician, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and George W. Bush, strays from the truth at times. To be fair, virtually every human being does. But Trump is fundamentally different.
His gamble is plain enough: He believes he can fool a lot of the American people a lot of the time. He has decided that lying pays.
It’s up to the rest of us to show him otherwise.
What I’m reading: As you know if you've been reading this newsletter, I'm sometimes critical of my own profession. The media is far from perfect, and we should grapple with our shortcomings.
This morning, however, I want to salute my peers – at Politico, Politifact, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, NPR, The New York Times and many other places – who have answered Trump’s fabrications with facts. I encourage all of you to dig into the links above.
The full Opinion report from The Times follows, including Maureen Dowd, Roxane Gay, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Andy Rosenthal, Will Wilkinson and others on the debate.
David Leonhardt
Op-Ed Columnist
Dear Times Reader, br br He lied about a sex tape... (show quote)


WOW! a one man commie news source talk about indoctrinated !

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 10:33:47   #
jer48 Loc: perris ca
 
Richard94611 wrote:
If any of the people asking questions mentioned the Supreme Court, I missed it. I admit I had to leave the TV for about ten minutes, but I still don't think anything was said about the Supreme Court.


there you go shooting off the mouth without facts of course she mentioned the supreme court and you more than likely saw it but it didn't fit into your agenda

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 10:49:12   #
S. Maturin
 
jer48 wrote:
there you go shooting off the mouth without facts of course she mentioned the supreme court and you more than likely saw it but it didn't fit into your agenda


Oh, the SCOTUS was a topic addressed by both and Trump mentioned the need for the judges to follow the law according to the Constitution while mush-brained Hillary went blah- blah-blah- with NO mention as to what should guide the supreme court decisions except-EXCEPT- public opinion of the day.

Hillary has the infantile view of laws as tools for social engineers to be used as needed by those in power --- a fashion statement Typical of dictators and tyrants.

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 10:57:53   #
Sassy Lass
 
S. Maturin wrote:
Oh, the SCOTUS was a topic addressed by both and Trump mentioned the need for the judges to follow the law according to the Constitution while mush-brained Hillary went blah- blah-blah- with NO mention as to what should guide the supreme court decisions except-EXCEPT- public opinion of the day.

Hillary has the infantile view of laws as tools for social engineers to be used as needed by those in power --- a fashion statement Typical of dictators and tyrants.


Amen!

Reply
 
 
Oct 11, 2016 17:36:31   #
dbleach3
 
Richard94611 wrote:
Dear Times Reader,

He lied about a sex tape.
He lied about his lies about ‘birtherism.’
He lied about the growth rate of the American economy.
He lied about the state of the job market.
He lied about the trade deficit.
He lied about tax rates.
He lied about his own position on the Iraq War, again.
He lied about ISIS.
He lied about the Benghazi attack.
He lied about the war in Syria.
He lied about Syrian refugees.
He lied about Russia’s hacking.
He lied about the San Bernardino terrorist attack.
He lied about Hillary Clinton’s tax plan.
He lied about her health care plan.
He lied about her immigration plan.
He lied about her email deletion.
He lied about Obamacare, more than once.
He lied about the rape of a 12-year-old girl.
He lied about his history of groping women without their consent.
Finally, he broke with basic democratic norms and called on his political opponent to be jailed — because, in large part, of what he described as her dishonesty.
This is the second time I’ve summarized a presidential debate by listing Donald Trump’s untruths, and there’s a reason. The country has never had a presidential candidate who lies the way that he does – relentlessly.
Yes, virtually every politician, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and George W. Bush, strays from the truth at times. To be fair, virtually every human being does. But Trump is fundamentally different.
His gamble is plain enough: He believes he can fool a lot of the American people a lot of the time. He has decided that lying pays.
It’s up to the rest of us to show him otherwise.
What I’m reading: As you know if you've been reading this newsletter, I'm sometimes critical of my own profession. The media is far from perfect, and we should grapple with our shortcomings.
This morning, however, I want to salute my peers – at Politico, Politifact, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, NPR, The New York Times and many other places – who have answered Trump’s fabrications with facts. I encourage all of you to dig into the links above.
The full Opinion report from The Times follows, including Maureen Dowd, Roxane Gay, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Andy Rosenthal, Will Wilkinson and others on the debate.
David Leonhardt
Op-Ed Columnist
Dear Times Reader, br br He lied about a sex tape... (show quote)


So show me these lies - the printed quote or the video tape. Any fool can say "he lied, he lied, he lied" forever w/o proving anything.

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 17:48:07   #
bilordinary Loc: SW Washington
 
dbleach3 wrote:
So show me these lies - the printed quote or the video tape. Any fool can say "he lied, he lied, he lied" forever w/o proving anything.


It just looks as if we have found another liberal liar, nice ring, " liberal liar".

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 19:23:40   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
Richard94611 wrote:
Dear Times Reader,

He lied about a sex tape.
He lied about his lies about ‘birtherism.’
He lied about the growth rate of the American economy.
He lied about the state of the job market.
He lied about the trade deficit.
He lied about tax rates.
He lied about his own position on the Iraq War, again.
He lied about ISIS.
He lied about the Benghazi attack.
He lied about the war in Syria.
He lied about Syrian refugees.
He lied about Russia’s hacking.
He lied about the San Bernardino terrorist attack.
He lied about Hillary Clinton’s tax plan.
He lied about her health care plan.
He lied about her immigration plan.
He lied about her email deletion.
He lied about Obamacare, more than once.
He lied about the rape of a 12-year-old girl.
He lied about his history of groping women without their consent.
Finally, he broke with basic democratic norms and called on his political opponent to be jailed — because, in large part, of what he described as her dishonesty.
This is the second time I’ve summarized a presidential debate by listing Donald Trump’s untruths, and there’s a reason. The country has never had a presidential candidate who lies the way that he does – relentlessly.
Yes, virtually every politician, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and George W. Bush, strays from the truth at times. To be fair, virtually every human being does. But Trump is fundamentally different.
His gamble is plain enough: He believes he can fool a lot of the American people a lot of the time. He has decided that lying pays.
It’s up to the rest of us to show him otherwise.
What I’m reading: As you know if you've been reading this newsletter, I'm sometimes critical of my own profession. The media is far from perfect, and we should grapple with our shortcomings.
This morning, however, I want to salute my peers – at Politico, Politifact, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, NPR, The New York Times and many other places – who have answered Trump’s fabrications with facts. I encourage all of you to dig into the links above.
The full Opinion report from The Times follows, including Maureen Dowd, Roxane Gay, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Andy Rosenthal, Will Wilkinson and others on the debate.
David Leonhardt
Op-Ed Columnist
Dear Times Reader, br br He lied about a sex tape... (show quote)


How do we know that all the above isn't opinion and lies. Look at the source and then be confident enough to bet your life that it's a huuuge embellishment.

Reply
Oct 11, 2016 20:19:02   #
bilordinary Loc: SW Washington
 
Richard94611 wrote:
If any of the people asking questions mentioned the Supreme Court, I missed it. I admit I had to leave the TV for about ten minutes, but I still don't think anything was said about the Supreme Court.


You are a big fat liar, prove me wrong!

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.