Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 30, 2016

Unprincipled WaPo Editors Damned Comey Critics - Now Join Them

The Washington Post editorial page is staunchly neoconservative and early on endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. On July 7 2016 the editors pinned an editorial defending FBI chief Comey's decision to then close the Clinton email case:

Republicans attack Mr. Comey for doing his job

IF REPUBLICANS believe the FBI director is corrupt and political, they should have the gumption to say so. Instead, many have insulted James B. Comey with slimy implications and underhanded threats since Tuesday, when he announced that he would not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton relating to her use of a private email server while secretary of state.

A look at today's Washington Post editorial page seems to demonstrate a change of mind:


From the first piece headlined James Comey is damaging our democracy:

First, the FBI director, James B. Comey, put himself enthusiastically forward as the arbiter of not only whether to prosecute a criminal case — which is not the job of the FBI — but also best practices in the handling of email and other matters. Now, he has chosen personally to restrike the balance between transparency and fairness, departing from the department’s traditions.

From the second piece by notorious mud-slinger Dana Milbank:

I’ve long believed in Comey’s integrity. But if he doesn’t step forward and explain his October Surprise, he may inadvertently wind up interfering in the political process — perhaps even reversing the outcome of a presidential election — in a way that would have made J. Edgar Hoover gape.

And the third strike:

FBI Director James B. Comey’s stunning announcement that he has directed investigators to begin reviewing new evidence in the Clinton email investigation was yet another troubling violation of long-standing Justice Department rules or precedent, conduct that raises serious questions about his judgment and ability to serve as the nation’s chief investigative official.

Back to the July 7 editorial:

“It appears damage is being done to the rule of law,” Mr. Ryan said. He’s right, but the FBI director isn’t doing the damage. The wreckers are those who cast baseless aspersions on U.S. law enforcement in the service of their partisan goals.

I for one believe that Comey was wrong in July and is right today. He should have pressed for charges against Clinton early on. Using a "secret" private email server for confidential state business is not legal and would have been out of bounds for anyone else. Now possible new evidence was found and must be investigated. It is not Comey's job to ask if the timing of a renewed investigation is convenient for the potential culprit. He also had to inform Congress because he had reasonably promised to do so. (He also needed to save his ass before anyone else in his department talked to the media.)

The so called "election" of a U.S. president is always a sorry show. But this season's version has at least some amusing moments. Seeing the hypocrites at Fred Hyatt's Funny Pages™ squirm is one of them. It makes me smirk.

Posted by b on October 30, 2016 at 12:37 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Certainly agree with you b ... everything about the candidates and this election stinks ... for instance, not much talk of human rights in Yemen, is there ...

UN warns US-Saudi war threatens mass starvation in Yemen

More than 10,000 people have been killed since the Saudi regime began its bombing campaign in March 2015. Millions more have been displaced, and urban areas and essential infrastructure have been reduced to rubble.

According to statements issued by UN agencies, over 14 million Yemenis, more than half the population, is now living in hunger, while 7 million are on the verge of starvation.

In a press briefing in Geneva Friday, the UN children’s agency UNICEF said that at least 370,000 children are at risk of severe malnutrition, and without urgent treatment will die. Fully 1.5 million children are malnourished.

... a vote within the menagerie is a vote for Yemeni genocide ... Palestinian genocide, Iraqi and Syrian genocide ... don't cast it!

No to Clinton, no to Trump. Change requires changing ... bad habits - like lessor of two evils voting - at the very least.

The measly 1.6% vote outside the menagerie in 2012 is a shameful, disgraceful blot on our national character. We must do at least 10 times better this time, and 2 or 3 X 10 times better would emasculate/sterilize the incoming elephant/jackass and put an end to their vile, dismissive attitude toward the 300+ million human beings, sovereign citizens of the United States of America.

Posted by: jfl | Oct 30 2016 12:49 utc | 1

Comment on Twitter, made me laugh.

Schrodinger's Election: Simultaneously hacked by Russia to make Trump win and not rigged at all if Killary wins.

Posted by: Juan Moment | Oct 30 2016 12:53 utc | 2

Whatever else happens in this race, it has been a pleasure watching the media destroy what little credibility they had left.

Posted by: Fontana | Oct 30 2016 13:24 utc | 3

@ 1 the very delusional jfl

You have never provided any fact that your Dr. Jill Stein can achieve a place where she can execute her words, and yet you cannot place anything no mater the subject without your caterwauling your empty and very foolish opinion. It reflects directly on your credibility which is approaching that of duffus magnificus.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Oct 30 2016 13:36 utc | 4

To put it simply, Comey is a 'dirty' cop. Most reading here probably know that Comey is a director on the BoD with HSBC bank, and that he was in charge of HSBC's defense when HSBC was charged with laundering drug moneys. That trial was held in NY where Loretta Lynch was the then serving Attorney General. HSBC got a slap on the wrist fine and no criminal charges were brought against the personnel at HSBC that actually over saw the laundering of black, dirty moneys.

Posted by: BRF | Oct 30 2016 13:43 utc | 5

All I care about is that Stein gets 5% so Greens can get some greenbacks for the next time, if there is one. In a vacuum Comey should be fired for violating FBI policy and for cluelessly and self-interstedly influencing a Presidential election.

Beyond that a Trump win, imo would be a Quickening toward genuine reform. Hillary would just extend the misery.

Posted by: Ben | Oct 30 2016 13:45 utc | 6

Not sure how the WaPo's hipocracy justifies the FBI dropping a bomb less than two weeks before the election. If a new crime had been uncovered, sure, but to reopen something they had ample time to vet is simply wrong at this stage pending something explosive. If having a two year campaign cycle is worth anything whatsoever, it is to allow things like this to be hashed out well in advance. I simply do not agree with the post.

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Oct 30 2016 13:59 utc | 7

Formerly T-Bear | Oct 30, 2016 9:36:48 AM | 4

Well and succinctly put...
#1 is lost in a world of delusion and nonsense...

Posted by: V. Arnold | Oct 30 2016 14:20 utc | 8

Comey is under pressure. Either thru his own reading of the situation and head banging (“I have to act now”), because threats of new/other leaks are looming, or because some are pushing to break the dams (e.g. internal to FBI) or just becos the info is so damning covering it up if it ever comes out will spark disaster for him in any case. Or a combination, or even other, extra, reasons.

He is compelled, or wishes to as a white knight, I doubt that actually, to ‘re-open’ with vague, indeterminate words, the HRC e-mail private-server matter. Obviously coverin’ his ass but waiting on decisions from the VIPs. (Lynch. Clinton.)

3 FBI investigs. are ongoing:

1) Into the Clinton Foundation, which was never halted but seems to limp along (held back? bogged down as very complicated, e.g. insider trading?) See also the Bill Clinton foundation, though afaik it is not under scrutiny?

2) Into the sexting Wiener scandal, which was ‘independent’? Not, imho, an FBI matter, but NY authorities? - Charges of sexting to minors, one person, one count, not too hard to deal with, but when huma - clinton - govmt. e-mails were found on ‘his’ laptop, another dimension came into play…

3) Killary private server, e-mail scandal, bis repetita

…> there might even be other unknowns

Imho these 3 investigs. have now become intertwined, there is simply no way for the FBI to keep up any Chinese Walls any longer.

Posted by: Noirette | Oct 30 2016 14:22 utc | 9

He had to issue it now as if he had held back till after the election the howls would have been thunderous,and the accusations of a fix much more readily apparent.
The only one to blame is the career f*ckup HRC.
America First,and lock her up.

Posted by: dahoit | Oct 30 2016 14:26 utc | 10

I wrote about Comey and the newly discovered emails on the Open Thread here and here

There's still lots of questions.

Some thought that Comey was part of the 'fix' when Bill Clinton met with Lynch on the tarmac and Comey subsequently made the judgment call to NOT recommend prosecution.

We then heard about flaws in the investigation:

1. Hillary's tech guy asking questions on Reddit about how to manipulate/destroy email info for a VIP;

2. Immunity given to virtually everyone involved that was close to Hillary. I believe that the number was 5 people. This seems overly generous and not in keeping with good investigative practice.

Comey's letter to Congress has reinvigorated the Trump campaign but also:

1. served as a distraction to Wikileaks release of the Podesta emails (MSMS wrote more about Russian hacking than about the Podesta emails)

2. allowed Hillary & Co. to grandstand and beat their chests

It's likely that Huma has told Hillary what these emails are (if Hillary didn't already know). So look at how hard Obama/Hillary fight the FBI to get a sense for how important these emails are.

There's a possibility that these emails are a nothingburger and that the Hillary campaign ultimately benefits from the perception that Republicans are after Hillary.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 30 2016 14:29 utc | 11

"The so called "election"..."
Exactly. There is nothing to 'elect'. The u.s. are a Janus-faced one party (or better 'class') tyranny.

Posted by: Pnyx | Oct 30 2016 14:42 utc | 12

"Using a "secret" private email server for confidential state business is not legal"

Um, entirely legal when Hillary used one, presuming that, like me, knowledge that frowning on something is not the same as illegal.

Also, the only real reason to not have one's own server was under the guise of "security".

Facts :

1) Her server was never hacked into.

2) The State Department server she would have used was hacked into some 203 times by your buddies in East Europe.

Posted by: Bardi | Oct 30 2016 14:43 utc | 13


Have you ever been party to a bureaucracy with electronic mail policies? If you are anal-retentive, have no family life and sleep an hour a day, you could possibly comply with the panoply written by lawyers covering the legal ass of the organization. Other than that….


Posted by: Ben | Oct 30 2016 14:53 utc | 14

"He should have pressed for charges against Clinton..." Sorry, no. It is not his position to press for charges or to advocate against him. It is his job to perform the investigation and turn to facts over to the prosecutor who decides whether or not a prosecution is warranted. He may decide that duties assigned to him are not consistent with the law and refuse to perform them, and has done so, but he does not decide how the law should be enforced.

Posted by: Bill H | Oct 30 2016 15:15 utc | 15

The weiner-abedin computer that carries sexting and US state emails has certainly been hacked. US state secrets are intermixed with porno emails and available to the public. yes america is great!

Posted by: Virgile | Oct 30 2016 15:34 utc | 16

I would like to propose an alternative explanation.

Yes, people less well connected have gone to jail for lesser offenses than Hillary Clinton and her unsecured email thing. However, I think this issue is being deliberately raised specifically to shield Hillary Clinton and boost her candidacy. It's being used to flood the airwaves, and drive out the even more damning evidence against her.

I mean, consider what she did in Libya: attacked a relatively prosperous and stable nation that was not a threat to us and was actually trying to cooperate, she allied us with Al Qaeda (!! why is this not blowing people's minds !!) blew it all to smithereens leaving behind a Mad max-style dystopia. And that's just for starters. There is her apparent desire to attack Russian forces in Syria, her desire to loot social security and give it all to her buddies in Wall Street, her desire to tear up the constitution and give supreme plenary power to multinational corporations... She is the Queen of Chaos, the candidate of Wall Street and War. She is Vlad the Impaler on crack.

I think the FBI suddenly raised this issue because the polls are tightening, and the establishment would prefer that in the remaining few days the airwaves be filled with lesser offenses that many Americans regard as technical, than with solid coverage of just what a corrupt monster Clinton really is. I mean, do you really think that any high governmeant official does anything that is not scripted and approved in advance?

Posted by: TG | Oct 30 2016 15:34 utc | 17

I'm halfway tempted to create a Washington post account so I can post a comment to Milbank's article:

The only person allowed to leave people agape is Bill Clinton.

Posted by: WG | Oct 30 2016 15:42 utc | 18

This would all be funny if it didn't represent the machinations of our overlords. This is like a carousel that is spinning out of control and now the pieces are starting to break off.

I hope that question that the rest of the world is asking itself is: Why the heck are we continuing to buy American T-bills?

The global plutocrats have had since 2008 to set this casting of throwing the US under the bus up. The US public will rise up but have been too brainwashed to do anything intelligent, unfortunately.

We need to rid ourselves of the tools that the global plutocrats use to retain control of the West, Private Finance and unfettered inheritance.

And yes, I voted for Jill Stein again because I want to see the Green party get to at least 5% so we can build another choice than the bifurcated one before Americans currently.

What is next? I don't think the show is over yet.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 30 2016 15:50 utc | 19

b: "I for one believe that Comey was wrong in July and is right today. He should have pressed for charges against Clinton early on."

Looks like he was wrong a lot farther back than July. Now we know that there was never a grand jury. Even the astute, ex-judge Andrew Napolitano claimed on more than one occasion that a GJ must be sitting. For instance, when the FIB gave immunity to Pagliano, that signaled to many in the know that a GJ had to be sitting. Not so. W/out a GJ, there was no real investigation. 147 FIB agents working on a sham.

Napolitano also predicted a Saturday Massacre if Hilton was not indicted -- dozens of FIB agents would resign. Two days day before Comey's October IED Napolitano claimed that was now happening -- FIB agents are resigning and once they are out, the leaks will become a flood. Comey is the Dutch boy with his thumb stuck up his ass in the dike. He is doing Hilton a favor by trying to keep pissed-off FIB agents from jumping ship and spilling beans in the week before the election.

There is one certainty in this election: Whoever loses it will be someone most Americans absolutely despise. (It is important to emphasize the positive.)

Posted by: Denis | Oct 30 2016 15:53 utc | 20

Formerly T-Bear @ #4

I love and venerate you for your consistency, but asking the Greens to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, in the face of all they have been doing this election and last, has me pushing my own 'reset' button.

Please do stop picking on jfl, who is not in the least delusional but rather very aware of the steep hill (hehe) Jill has to cimb.

Speaking of hills (hehe again) there are seven of them, and as you will recall, Rome wasn't built in a day.

But it was built.

Posted by: juliania | Oct 30 2016 16:03 utc | 21

The partisanship exhibited in many of the above comments is exactly what the election is about: an effort to legitimize the illegitimate. There is a solution ... instead of Trump vs Clinton or going on about the validity of Johnson or Stein ... what if the Americans did something totally worthwhile ... and simply boycott the whole shooting match. The solution for the illegitimate election is simple: prove it is illegitimate by refusing to participate. It is a sham and a fraud ... imagine if only three or four percent of the Americans bothered to vote? It would indicate what we all know ... that voting does not matter.

In the meantime, it is October 30th here on the Llano Estacado ... high, dry warm. Normally by the end of October we have had a freeze (or more). Not this year ... hell, most of the trees still have green leaves. And I have cannas still blooming!

Posted by: rg the lg | Oct 30 2016 16:09 utc | 22

hillary lost to obama, a political nobody whom nobody ever heard of.
hillary would have lost to sanders, an elderly, jewish, self proclaimed socialist.

there is only one person in this election, half the people will vote against him and half will vote for him

Posted by: pA | Oct 30 2016 16:16 utc | 23

To jfl @ 1:

I watched the returns all of the night during the last election, and for the Greens the percentages stayed exactly the same, while others fluctuated. To me that was a signal that something was very wrong. I don't believe the actual vote was accurately reflected there.

Even so, I am clear eyed and determined when I say I am going to cast my vote for Jill Stein and her distinguished VP runningmate. (I don't want to mangle the spelling of his name; nonetheless I respect his record.) What happens beyond what I can do is beyond my control, but I have just finished reading an excellent novel, "The Tenderness of Wolves" and here's a quote from the author, Stef Penney, that applies:

"I think it means [the title] that we're often wrong about things we don't understand - particularly the things we fear. Just because we think of wolves (or the wilderness, or another race) as wild and fierce, doesn't mean there isn't another side to them."

As has been shown to be the case with James B. Comey - and I was glad to see Trump saying very much the same thing when he commented on Mr. Comey's change of heart.

Don't lose heart!

Posted by: juliania | Oct 30 2016 16:18 utc | 24

@ rg the lg

Would you please provide example(s) of where not voting has resulted in delegitimizing anything.


Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 30 2016 16:28 utc | 25

thanks b... one can quickly tell who the americans are here at moa..

@3 fontana.. yes i agree!

@15 virgile / @17 wg - thanks for that!

@20 julianna.. ditto your comment.

Posted by: james | Oct 30 2016 16:29 utc | 26

FBI = Fumbling Bureaucratic Incompetence

(mostly maybe not all but especially those at the top like anywhere else it's a bad situation when you have to decide whether they're being incompetent or corrupt)

Posted by: Curtis | Oct 30 2016 16:30 utc | 27

@ juliania | Oct 30, 2016 12:03:44 PM | 20

By all means please do vote Greens or whatever group you may admire; fill the ballot boxes with your votes for Congress, for all state legislatures, county governments and local public offices; Just don't waste your vote for the office of federal presidential electors. Those are the critical votes and there are, at this time, only two candidates which CAN win. As a voter, it is up to you, it is your duty living in a Republic, to examine exactly what your public interests are and despite the moral oder that either candidate may (or may not) have, and cast your ballot for chief administrator of the United States toward that candidate which best meets your personal interests. Finding one's personal interests is no mean job given the lifelong assault of the marketeers and propagandists selling you your happiness (as they deem that to be). There isn't much time left to do your calculations and come to your decision - but the constant whinging that Dr. Jill Stein is the only choice is just plain wrong, and so is jfl for that matter - on that I will not surrender.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Oct 30 2016 16:33 utc | 28

And in other empire building/dying news there is this from Turkey

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 30 2016 16:41 utc | 29

Hillary is taking a risk in asking the FBI for more details. It could backfire. If Comey is put under heavy pressure to unveil the reasons that made him send this warning to the Congress, he may admit that at least one email his team checked was classified.
That would be a huge blow to Hillary's campaign. She may have either to withdraw from the elections or risk been prosecuted after she is elected. She should pray that the FBI does not release more details...
The funny aspect of this struggle is three women are involved in the justice abuse drama: Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and Loretta Lynch, while three men are involved in the sexual abuse drama: Trump, Bill Clinton and Weiner.
This will make the next successful series on HBO: Sex, power and politic!

Posted by: virgile | Oct 30 2016 16:46 utc | 30

Had enough to of this meaningless disgusting farce called elections in the US and what wonder the hell purpose it serves?
Here is the answer:

Posted by: Kalen | Oct 30 2016 16:55 utc | 31

In nearly all public discourse in the US there is such a toxic lack of substantiation that we might as well ignore it. One can only hope that new Deep Throats can get to broadcast the undeniable truth that puts the criminals in jail. Because for now, you don't have to follow the money. Where the money is is self-evident.

Posted by: stumpy | Oct 30 2016 17:25 utc | 32

Slow (but steady) unraveling of the USA is already baked in, regardless of this election's result. America is unsalvageable in its present form and function. It needs a complete overhaul, a total reset, or it will fracture and fall apart.

Posted by: telescope | Oct 30 2016 17:37 utc | 33

Here's stuff you didn't know about Trump. Not silly or salacious.

Posted by: Penelope | Oct 30 2016 17:46 utc | 34

@ rg the lg

Would you please provide example(s) of where not voting has resulted in delegitimizing anything.


Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 30, 2016 12:28:47 PM | 24

Hungary's refugee referendum not valid after voters stay away
PM Viktor Orbán fails to convince 50% of electorate to turn out, but those who did so voted to exclude new refugees

Posted by: Killary PAC | Oct 30 2016 18:11 utc | 35

@Formerly T-Bear | Oct 30, 2016 12:33:22 PM | 27

Your comments remind me of what happens when you ask a Democrat why they support Clinton... they cannot provide a coherent reason. Ask any Jill Stein supporter and they will give you numerous Green Party policy issues that they fully support. So, I'll show you mine if you show me yours :-).

The two reasons why I truly believe Jill Stein is the only choice (I could give many more, but these should suffice), are climate change and nuclear war. Despite all the bullshit that Obama and the Democrats have been saying regarding climate change, their actions show that they are being duplicitous. Furthermore, if the TPP passes, it will make it practically impossible to address climate change. Make no mistake, if Clinton wins, it will pass. In Trump's defense, at least he says that he is against it.

I'm sure it's no secret a Clinton presidency will very likely lead us to a confrontation with either Russia, China, North Korea, or all three. Again, in Trump's defense he says that he want's to work with Russia and address NATO. I do believe him to a degree, but that brings us back to climate change and the fact that at this stage of the game he still denies it. He might prevent nuclear war, but it's like putting out a fire with dynamite... it might work, but there is going to be a lot of damage.

Yes, it is extremely difficult for Stein to win, but not impossible. Only 18% of voters participated in the primaries, the majority of voters are independent, and the population millennials has surpassed that of the baby boomers. If people were to listen to the point of view you express, then yes, it would be impossible for her to win. I will vote for who I think would be better for this country and feel damn good about it. If a Trump victory would be the largest "fuck you" in history, a Stein victory would be the larget mandate.

Posted by: Tobin Paz | Oct 30 2016 18:14 utc | 36

President Putin’s speech at Valdai:
October 29, 2016.
(Putin covers everything, deserves a full read)

Posted by: mauisurfer | Oct 30 2016 18:22 utc | 37

The story now is that FIB agents investigating Weiner's kiddie sexting stumbled on Abedin's em's on Weiner's laptop. Apparently, they think they have to have a special search warrant to look at her em's.

Let me tell you, if the FIB ever got a search warrant for your husband's computer and found your criminal em's on that computer, the original search warrant for the computer would be more than enough to allow them to open your em's. But the rules are different for Hilton, Bilton, and the entire Clinton RICO team.

Sounds like FIB is going to Abedin's suits and asking for permission to look at the em's. Like WTF???? Since when does FIB or any law enforcement seek permission from a target's legal team to carry out an investigation?

CNN also raises the specter of spousal privilege between Wiener and Abedin. Shouldn't be a problem. Spousal privilege means one spouse cannot be compelled to testify against another. It does not provide a safe haven on one spouse's computer for illegal em's of the other . . . well, you know, unless you are on the Clinton RICO team. CNN's theory (probably from Jeffrey Toobin) would be like saying, the cops can't look in a wife's underwear drawer for a pistol used by the husband to commit a murder. What BS.

Posted by: Denis | Oct 30 2016 18:22 utc | 38

As far as I can tell, Comey knew that getting an expanded warrant (to cover actually opening Abedin's newly discovered email trove) would be leaked and that that would be more damaging (in many ways to many people) ... so he bit the bullet and is being subjected to massive criticism from everyone ...

Imagine the bombshell if they had attempted to keep this secret and it had been revealed next week or after the election ...

""The issue is complicated because the computer is considered to belong to Anthony Weiner, her estranged husband, and the case may raise spousal privilege legal protections for Abedin.

Government lawyers hope to secure the warrant to permit investigators to review thousands of emails on a computer Abedin shared with Weiner, officials said.The new search warrant is needed because the existing authorization, covered by a subpoena, related only to the ongoing investigation of Weiner, who is accused of having sexually explicit communications with an underage girl.Investigators from the FBI's New York field office who are conducting the Weiner investigation " ""

cnn: Justice Department seeks approval for email search
(there are reports that Abedin -- as is customary -- swore under oath that she had scrubbed all state department documents from all of her personal devices ... and -- FWIW -- she was granted immunity during the earlier investigation ...

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 18:29 utc | 39

A political commentator believes the polls in the United States are being “manipulated,” adding that they are not reflecting the will of the American people.

“Trump is an outsider. He is coming in new. He does not have any political history, he has no political experience. He is coming as an agent of change,” Mike Harris told Press TV in an interview on Sunday.

SCARY...Helloween coming,& you know what that means...Samhain.
That's right...even worse than this this year:

Sometimes right on time, almost as if using a calendar(!), like 2011 when they decided to sacrifice MF Global.
Or 2011 also when they ended their murderous bombing of Libya, started earlier MAR 31 by those uncouth frenchie fokkers.

Sometimes "celebrated" late, as in 1956 NOV 5 with Brits sending invasion force to take back Suez that Nasser just nationalized, or 1979 NOV 4 Iran US embassy hostages (not like that wasn't due...Mossadegh was overthrown in 1953).

Posted by: schlub | Oct 30 2016 18:37 utc | 40

note that -- at this point -- it's all Comey all of the time and Comey is now considered to be part of the vast right wing conspiracy victimizing Hillary Clinton again ...

See also: under the heading of "when did you stop beating your wife", Comey is being presumed to either want Clinton to lose or want Trump to win ... and is in a position where as FBI director he cannot comment, because that would be "partisan" ...

caveat: I'm unaware of any evidence to support the presumption Comey supports Trump. If it exists, I apologize ... google provides nothing.

This morning, Kaine is demanding Comey "reveal" whether he has reviewed the e-mails -- when it's apparent that he has not ... because they do not have a warrant covering same .....


Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 18:40 utc | 41

So Comey didn't use any of the Podesta files as evidence ? He's still an establishment coward. Comedy is a A lower class of criminal still serving a higher class of partisan criminals.

Posted by: tom | Oct 30 2016 18:41 utc | 42

That's Comey not comedy, could work but It's far worse.

Posted by: tom | Oct 30 2016 18:42 utc | 43

As stated on an earlier thread, this election is getting boring. No one has even shown where any but the two historical parties will take a state and enable their electors to vote for president - there is not a single political party - period, end of discussion. What happens afterword are the consequences for an electorate that, in failure to find a more diplomatic term, are too dumb to live. Enjoy your lives, whatever remains will certainly become the lowest common denominator - ever. You can trust this - I shall never become involved in the overthrow of your government, however I shall not lift a finger to stay its downfall. From what transpires in the likes of this forum, there is not the capacity needed to be a citizen of a Republic; do with the corpse what you will; I may go watch the movie when it comes out if the book is any good.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Oct 30 2016 18:48 utc | 44

Sure drove WikiLeaks' (damning) Band memo out of discussion or consideration ... and the irony is that this probably -- ultimately -- has nothing to do with Clinton ... I think Abedin's career is over ... which is a good thing since the reports of Clinton's cult-like oh-so-"loyal" inner circle were dismaying (cough).

GOP congresscritters were already having kittens over the number of Clinton insiders granted immunity during the long tangled course of the investigation ..
Cnn 09/23/201.

Caveat: I previously found mention of Abedin getting immunity prior to July and now cannot find a confirming source .... sigh

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 18:58 utc | 45

If using a private server to get around FOIA was a problem, it was a problem then, not now. But getting around FOIA was something everybody else, as well as Clinton wanted. That's why they had no problems sending and receiving emails from another server. If most of these people never really look at urls, their tech people and security people, did. They passed it as acceptable. Comey couldn't prosecute Clinton without prosecuting all those people too, which is impossible. Pretending you really give a shit about the server when you don' care about all those other people who committed the same crime just proves one thing: It's a political prosecution aimed exclusively at an opponent. Another phrase for political prosecution is "show trial." You can't always make sure only the people you don't like get prosecuted.

And, security issues? In the world of Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and wikileaks, no sensible and honest person thinks using government equipment means security.

The only use for this fake scandal is to pander to mad dog reactionaries.

Posted by: s | Oct 30 2016 19:04 utc | 46

psychohistorian says:

Would you please provide example(s) of where not voting has resulted in delegitimizing anything

non-voters are the largest political group in America.

wake up,

you twit

Posted by: john | Oct 30 2016 19:11 utc | 47

@35 Tobin

I understand the appeal for the greens. I do, really. Everything i have read about Stein and her platform (with the exclusion of the allegation of her VP pick association with Soros) seems very reasonable and welcome. She has even conceded that Trump would be safer than Clinton (that takes a mensch). She has warned about the coming mandatory vaccines. She puts herself out there on the lines and demnstrates. She is no doubt a hero in the vein of Nader. Kudos to her. The question is, however, where the butter meets the bread, this appeal is to ethos rather than what should be acceptable to elect a president: that of appeals to logos and pathos.

Jill Stein could not continue on the hard path to salvage what is left in the US. Her policies would condem the hard choices, yes the unsavory choices, that only the Donald has said he could make. Stein would be put into an impossible situation where she would have to foresake her promises. This presents an insurmountable problem wherasTrump has spoken of what is logically necessary already. It is no wonder that he has tailored his appeal to emotion and feeling so masterfully as this is the flipside to his rather impressive policy outline in the immediate days of his entering office. Really SENSIBLE stuff. But it will hurt. I hope he will pull a few punches when bringing down the hammer, especially when it comes to undocumented families here in the states. Remember that Obama has realized the necessity for this too and has so far escaped the bad press that would tarnish his fool's gold legacy.

If I could echo a little T-BeaR here, too. What scares me about Hillary, and what should scare others, is her outright stupidity and ignorance which will be sanctioned with her future power. She is indeed a puppet, as Donald says, but is their anything more frightening than a puppet unaware of her strings? She is a true-believer in the shit that comes rolling down the steps from the temple. Furthermore, she feels as though the obscurantism she espouses in her wikileaks emails is warranted policy, as if millenia of western history, starting with the doomed foray of Athens into war with Sicily, wouldn't be enough to change anyone's mind.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Oct 30 2016 19:11 utc | 48

Huma no sign of today 30th on or near Clingon campaign plane Florida this AM.

Supposedly Lord O tried but failed to directly intercede to block the FBI from searching Anthony's computer.

Maybe that 'suicided' top US missile general a day ago was the start of the cleanup crew moving, & the rats are doing what they always do---ratting, or scurrying for cover.

OH, the Huma-nity!

Posted by: schlub | Oct 30 2016 19:22 utc | 49


With respect, are you serious? "Undocumented families in the United States"? You really think that is a priority issue for this country at this time?

I'm sorry, but I do believe Jill's policies are hard choices. It may sound flimsy and wimpy to talk about a "Green New Deal" until you look at where we are versus where we need to be. On a war footing is what she is proposing, but one which doesn't involve dropping bombs and supplying crazies with automatic weaponry. The people were ready for this change of direction in 2008 - boy, were they ready! All they needed was leadership at the top brave enough to turn away from entrenched corporate intransigence that will eventually kill us all, documented or not.

Posted by: juliania | Oct 30 2016 19:30 utc | 50


I live in Oregon. Furthermore, I work for a school district. I see undocumented children of families personally and with regularity. Oregon has a good number of undocumented labor. My comment was an example of the myriad effects of coming policy. One example of which I am emotionally interested. Is there a problem with that?

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Oct 30 2016 19:36 utc | 51

Don't know about the date of this,or the site,from a commentator at Syriapers apparently breaking news???
Rep Jason Cheffetz [R-UT] House over site committee..
Did Hilary Clinton give non cleared people access to classified information? Comey.. Yes sir.

Posted by: harrylaw | Oct 30 2016 19:45 utc | 52

@ Juliana

Again, I echo T-Bear: what are Dr. Stein's chances, really? Look in your heart.

Once again: in this case, Donald is the only viable peace candidate.

My comment did have a purpose. It was to convince others to acknowledge not only the greens' lack of a chance of success, but also question the viability of ethical policy in a situation where you need a hatchet man. If the US is an out-of-control yugo with an engine fire approaching a banked curve at the vehicle's top speed of 45 km/hour, you're gonna need someone who can drive a stick. I think the prius only comes in automatic.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Oct 30 2016 19:45 utc | 53

Formerly T-Bear@27

Thanks for responding to my comment. I apologize for being slow to answer - I was reading from the bottom of the thread up this time around.

I don't want to pre-empt discussion of b's important point here, with which I concluded above. I actually feel that Comey isn't doing himself any favors with this turnabout on the emails, and anything that one would rather not do but feels obliged to do brings a credibility to the action that wins my respect - though I freely admit I know very little about what is going on, and as you say, I'm as fallible as anyone.

Still, I don't feel your criticism of 'wingeing' is valid, and thanks to Tobin Paz @35 for eloquently describing some of the issues we both agree are important. Most of my own personal information as a voter I retrieve online by reading - it's easy to do with all the search engines out there. I no longer trust any of the mainstream news outlets, and that even includes Democracynow - though I go to read a transcript now and then. So with that caveat I agree that one should (and can) go and see for oneself what is being offered, weighing one's action against all pros and cons. Thank you for spelling those out as you see them.

Posted by: juliania | Oct 30 2016 19:57 utc | 54

I don't think you guys get it, so I'll repeat it once again, as a bullet list:

You have to vote for the national elections, that's your duty as a citizen-slave.

You have to accept the outcome, that's your sorry state in life as Little People.

By next April 15th, scrape up $4,000,000,000,000 to feed The Exceptionals.

It's not a Democracy. It's the Bankers + Rentiers + Mil.Gov.Fed's power trip.

We won, you lost. It's just business, get over it. Now get back to work!

Posted by: chipnik | Oct 30 2016 20:15 utc | 55

Apologies, NemesisCalling @52. My emotions got the best of me. It was having to reflect upon the 'hard choices, even unsavory choices' that gave me pause, and I didn't express myself well. There certainly do need to be more sensible ways to encourage the undocumented families either not to come or to become citizens, and the solutions don't have to be unsavory ones. Russia, for instance has absorbed large numbers of refugees from Ukraine, and they are not as rich an economy as ours.

But the influx of undocumented workers is a crisis whose roots go far beyond anything we can orchestrate here. I don't find our present situation at all sensible, and I do think Jill Stein has a practical solution along the lines I have suggested.

Again, my apologies. What is important to each of us, is important.

Posted by: juliania | Oct 30 2016 20:20 utc | 56

Jill LIke others, quoted above, Jill just wants her paws on the five mil Her personal investment portfolio is filled with Big Oil stocks. Google it, there are loads of links:

Newbies to AmeriConned corruption, welcome. I remember the Kennedy election and others. It's always been fucked, since the beginning. I feel for you that are just finding out.

Posted by: bSirius | Oct 30 2016 20:21 utc | 57


Which is precisely why the TPTB invented the electoral college and gave you two faces of the same steaming lump of corrupt bankster excrement to 'choose' from. You're not going to change anything, whether you vote Red, Blue, Green or don't!
The cardinals elect the Pope, and electoral charnel house elects the Executive.

Look for the White smoke, then you can go back to work.

Posted by: chipnik | Oct 30 2016 20:26 utc | 58


I've just moved into a community that once was White business people and retirees, now the local schools are a stream of brown faces walking to the school buses, and filling the shopping malls. You have to go downtown to the hoi-polloi bar and there the last remaining Whites are, getting bombed.

So yesterday I shot basketball with the kids of some brown people, then found out they are from near where I am from! So we all had a good laugh how sucky it is to be (back in) the Great White again, lorded over by serial White grifter bunko artists and their political bern teams.

You see, none of us will escape with our lives, or our life savings.

Exceptionals will get it all. So we might as well join the Browns.

Posted by: chipnik | Oct 30 2016 20:33 utc | 59

Obviously Huma had an email account on Weiner's computer. It seems that the existence of this account and its email contents were found while looking at Wiener's email account.
Possibly it is a pop3 account (connected to Hillary server) meaning that these emails have been downloaded from the server and are physically on the computer probably without any password. If these emails are duplicates of 'classified' emails that Hillary has purposely deleted from her server, then she and Huma could be in deep trouble. In any case Huma is in trouble even if the emails are not classified as she did not declare their existence to the FBI. I understand the Wiener computer is in the hands of the Wiener's case investigators.
My guess is that the FBI has already had access to that computer and had a peek at these emails. I think that after examining some of them, they realize they were relevant to the investigation. As they have no warrant, they cannot announce anything officially. The FBI is now waiting for a warrant from Huma's lawers to officially view the account.
If Hillary is so keen to have details from these email, Huma should immediately give the ok for a warrant.
My opinion is that Hillary is terrified that these emails are very damaging so she needs to obstruct their release, while still accusing the FBI of backstabbing. It seems that her only chance is to discredit Comey and she is working on that now.

Posted by: virgile | Oct 30 2016 20:41 utc | 60

My suspicion was always that Comey was trying to preempt a leak ... likely by some FBI-well connected congress critter ... According to the NYT, while Weiner investigators (and god knows who else) have known about the e-mails for weeks, Comey was not informed until shortly before his announcement (he must have been angry and horrified).
I still think that the shit-storm that would have erupted from a "leak" of a "secret" newly expanded arm of a "closed" investigation would have been far worse ... wrt to the whole "undermining" or "rigging" the election meme being sold -- by both parties ...

I'm getting conflicting impressions of "plausible deniability" by folks claiming to have been blind-sided by Comey's announcement ... I think (as I've said before) Comey is the designated whipping boy, and perhaps even volunteered to be just that, as everyone and their brother expresses horror at something that cannot be undone ...

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 20:51 utc | 61

s @ 45

And, security issues? In the world of Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and wikileaks, no sensible and honest person thinks using government equipment means security.

The only use for this fake scandal is to pander to mad dog reactionaries.

Couldn't agree more.

Bardi @ 12

Yep! (see above)

Tobin Paz @ 35

Ditto! (I cast early ballot marked "Stein" on Monday).

NemesisCalling @ 47

With all due respect, can't agree with anything you said (2 paragraphs).

Vaccines? You mis-state what she said, it's not even fringe on her platform, and only reason it came up was because she had to answer to non-sense anti-vaxxer "stuff".

She never conceded (or implied)... "Trump would be safer than Clinton" (although Briebat's tried to twist her words into saying so).

She's light-years removed from Nader in more ways then I can count, and has addressed ME issues in detail and accurately in major talks... something that was not even on Nader's plate.

Stein would be put into an impossible situation where she would have to foresake her promises. This presents an insurmountable problem

Huh? Like what?

wherasTrump has spoken of what is logically necessary already. It is no wonder that he has tailored his appeal to emotion and feeling so masterfully as this is the flipside to his rather impressive policy outline in the immediate days of his entering office.

Right. Let's see...

- special prosecutor for Hillary (that will really unify the country)
- sue all his growing list of "groping" accusers
- seize Iraqi oil fields... that ought'a sooth things over there
- build a wall that Mexico's going to pay for... ???
- One week Putin's "smart guy" Donald wants to talk with, last debate Donald "never met him", doesn't know him, and has proposed nothing other then massive military buildup and "bombing the shiite" out of ISIS.
- And oh yea, go after China for currency manipulation which ended over 4 years ago, and some nonsense they've "stolen our jobs". More 100% wrong in this then could be addressed in 10k words (US investors sent our "enterprises" there for cheap labor and to avoid costly environmental regs. A.. "business" decision.)

Anyway, what Juliana said @ 49

NemesisCalling @ 52

I'll speak for myself:

what are Dr. Stein's chances, really?

To win? next to none.

To get 5% so she can be on national radar in 2020? Good.

Reading your comment about immigrants/Oregon (etc.), I don't doubt your sincerity.

I unabashedly think your calling Trump a 'peace candidate" is, with all due respect, and exercise in self-delusion. His transition team is headed by, among others, same neocons that drove GWB policy. He wants to ramp up our nuke budget/arsenal (maybe frivolous talk, but it's what he said), and the SNL parodies of him or more real then comical.

AFAIC, either Donald or Hillary is... a race to the bottom. Come 2020, whichever is elected, same people will be here (and all over web) howling about how big they've been fucked the previous 4 years. Same thing that's happened in 4 years cycles since 2000.

It's not about fawning of Stein, just she's the only one talking about the most important things... in detail, with good solutions that don't include more war, and economic necessities nobody else is talking about.

Her ideas (especially in ME)... none of the candidates or their parties, are even remotely considering. And they make soooo much sense.

Even with all the talk around here last few day of well $$'d jewish influence, she's only one even broaching the subject of combination of sanctions/with-holding US financing of Israel's militarization (which BO just renewed BTW, with big increase... a head-scratcher). And Jill's Jewish!!! :)

I really hope she gets a REAL chance in 2020.

Posted by: jdmckay | Oct 30 2016 21:03 utc | 62

Calling for the FBI to release information is double edged.

If the emails are copies of the ones that Hillary destroyed from her server because they were too compromising then she will be in deep trouble.

I guess her only way out is to discredit Comey and get him out of the way. Is Comey strong enough to stand against the war Clinton will start on him?

Posted by: virgile | Oct 30 2016 21:04 utc | 63

I guess you pick the argument you want to address and ignore what others actually say. What is advanced in response to my argument is along the lines of, 'But X can't win. Only the Elephant or the Jackass can win'. I agree that X cannot win ... well, can, but has a vanishingly small probability of doing so. Jill Stein is X in my case.

But I am no fan of any 3rd Party. I am a fan of breaking the two-party, first-pass-the-post system. Of enabling popular sovereignty. My contention is that one of ... certainly not the only or most effective of ... our means to effect that change is to vote for ANYONE but the Elephant or the Jackass. For there is not a dime's worth of difference between the Elephant and the Jackass. And a strong showing for the 'other', non-Elephant/non-Jackass candidates in toto will empower ourselves to seek change. Will make us each realize ... 'Hey, I coulda had a V-8!' ... and encourage us to make common cause with all the other 'others' and to carry-on from there, to realize that change. The Elephant or the Jackass will be 'elected' POTUS in 2016.

Now, you may say,

1. 'Hey there is a difference between the Elephant and the Jackass, the _____ is less evil than the _____ !'

Or, you may say,

2. 'Hey, you're just a dreamer! Everyone is going to vote for the Elephant or the Jackass - just as I am - and that's Just The Way It Is!'

Or, you may say,

3. 'Don't vote!, it only encourages them.' ... or it's 'modern' equivalent.

I regard the three with different emotions, but I regard them all as functionally equivalent : acquiescence to stasis in the face of our incipient, increasingly progressive, political decline.

I refuse to accept that ... 'We won, you lost. It's just business, get over it.' ... I assert that there is an alternative. I invite other refuseniks to join me, and together to effect change. That's the goal. Whether it is reached or not, it is good to attempt it.

Posted by: jfl | Oct 30 2016 21:05 utc | 64

TG @16

I liked the bits about what Hillary has done but I don't see a conspiracy necessarily .

Last night was Jews on the menu at MOA and I was in the middle of the mind-blowing work by Douglas Reid called The Controversy of Zion, written in the 1950s and an astonishing piece of work.

Posted by: Lochearn | Oct 30 2016 21:06 utc | 65

Gee! What could go wrong with a scenario like that – a high-ranking government official seeking to become president who exhibits callous disregard for national security protocols, a trusted aide who worked in her family magazine in Saudi Arabia on behalf of radical Islamic causes who was married to a Jewish member of Congress who had a propensity for compromising himself through illicit and bizarre sexual activity?

“I have an idea! Let’s make the architect of this mess the president of the United States.” That’s what the Democratic Party decided.

Posted by: virgile | Oct 30 2016 21:08 utc | 66

@56 Jill Stein Responds to Daily Beast Smear Attack

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Oct 30 2016 21:12 utc | 67

Demanding that the DOJ or FBI "release all the information" is simply grandstanding ... they can't (they apparently don't have legal access and haven't reviewed it) ... and Weiner and Abedin are entitled to privacy protection for all non-related content, and the various government agencies also have security and other concerns ...

Demand away!!! Film at 11!!! Shake that fist, hold your breath until your face is read and your eyes bulge ... show the world just how well you can simulate OUTRAGE.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 21:14 utc | 68

and let's not forget -- as everyone seems to be doing -- that these e-mails are years old and that there is no genuine urgency to this matter, no matter how much outrage and urgency and panic and other theatrics are demonstrated.

This investigation is (almost certainly) a dead parrot ... but like Weiner's sexting, it's something everyone can quite safely be OUTRAGED!!! about. Democrats and Clinton supporter long ago announce they didn't give a flying fig about Clinton's disregard for rules or transparency or truthfulness ... and the Republicans demonstrated -- that like Whitewater and Benghazi that came before -- that they didn't care about a lack of actionable findings as determined by those empowered to make such determinations ... There were no indictments because even the wrongdoing that was found was "determined" to not rise to the criteria necessary wrt to intent.

so, they cry ... let's have another investigation, more hearings, maybe a change in venues, leadership, oversight authority ...

(is it rigged? almost certainly, but more more and more isn't likely to change the outcome)

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 21:22 utc | 69

Susan Sunflower @ 40

Probably just a coincidence, but as for Kaine making demands on Comey, one has to wonder why he doesn't just pick up the phone and call him?

How close they are (were) is hard to say, but they are certainly well acquainted. Both lived in Richmond, and taught at the University of Richmond Law School, a small, private school. Both moved in the same Richmond social circle and have friends in common.

Believe me, I do not move in that social circle, or have many friends in Richmond, but at least two are also friends of both Kaine and Comey. Maybe Kaine's wife could just call Comey's wife to find out what's going on. Or maybe Kaine is starting to get cold feet about running with Hillary and put Comey up to this. :-)

Small world. Just another oddity of this comedy-horror show of an election.

Posted by: Ken Nari | Oct 30 2016 21:38 utc | 70

We should not be ashamed if a fan of Jill Stein or 3rd party, even if the majority are against you. You are not alone. 30% (guessing) or more would like to see 3rd party candidates in any public debates. We should be ashamed or complicity to crimes to mankind if votes for known murders and liars.

How we vote will determine the outcome generations to come. There maybe slow or fast transition. I prefer ballot’s box than the streets. However, if pitchforks are necessary so be it.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Oct 30 2016 21:59 utc | 71

Re: But this season's version has at least some amusing moments.

I have tried to collect the funniest moments to this page on ACLOS:

US presidential elections

1 - Trump loves Putin
1.1 - Trump conspires with Putin

2 - Putin rigs elections
2.1 - Trump and Putin poisoned Hillary
2.2 - Assange sucks Putin's dick
2.3 - McCarthy runs for president

3 - News of Putin's rigging of election makes Americans question integrity of election
3.1 - Obama threatens WW3 with Russia
3.2 - Obama launches cyber attack on Russia
3.3 - Trump won't accept result if he loses

4 - Obama cancels elections

5 - Hillary grabs pussy

6 - Historians find signs of intelligent life

7 - The ballots

Everything is sourced to the most reliable sources, like the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Oct 30 2016 22:00 utc | 72

Sorry, the link was broken: US presidential elections

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Oct 30 2016 22:02 utc | 73

@jdmckay 61

you can pick apart my post all you like but you have failed to see the context. and I guess it bears repeating that "peace candidate" should have been in quotations, as, obviously, this version of "peace candidate" is more v2.0 than what real anti-war activists would like and have fought for in the last fifty years. But the fact remains: Donald Trump is on the "stability side" of ME politics/chaos. There, is this better?: he is the "stability candidate." And this is regardless of what he says about Iran and other multiple personality stances on the ME he painfully rambles on about. Whether he is aware of it or not, if Syria and the Shi'a crescent survives, Iran will be safe for decades to come. The truth is out there and although it may be fledgling, the fact is that the multi-polar world is emerging and the zionists are in retreat. Better to bail now and go with the Donald.

you said:

Vaccines? You mis-state what she said, it's not even fringe on her platform, and only reason it came up was because she had to answer to non-sense anti-vaxxer "stuff".

Dr. Stein has sounded the alarms about pushing mandatory vaccines. She didn't use those exact words but, in effect, that is the result. Do you know about California? If that mandatory order comes to Oregon, you can be sure that I will be sending my kid to private schools for religious exemption and you can be sure that I will be fighting for taxation exemption regarding public schooling, as well. Talk about a sign of the end times...and I'm not even that religious. But, if you trust the CDC and our .gov...hey, by all means, buddy, you be the guinea pig. (Keep in mind that I have questions about the safety of vaccines, not beliefs. This is Dr. Stein's position.)

you said:

She never conceded (or implied)... "Trump would be safer than Clinton" (although Briebat's tried to twist her words into saying so).

Dr. Stein said:

On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary's policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.

Let's move on.

Regarding Nader: she is an independent that is generally well liked and is, from what I can tell, a spotless candidate. She reminds me of Nader, but if you want to believe otherwise, feel free.

Stein: following my assertion that Stein is an ethical candidate, and not a logical one, please prove me wrong that she would not be reneging on her humanitarian platform when she has to accelerate deportations to cool a crazed and angry populace. Or slow down energy sector industry and not face vicious blowback. WHERE.THE.BUTTER.MEETS.THE.BREAD101. If you think people are pissed now, wait till the bottom falls out. Heads will roll, that's all I'm saying. It may get too hot for her.

ISIS is a tool in the empire's arsenal. When the empire can no longer support the upkeep of said tool, there will be an uptick in Norelco's stocks with all the beard trimming going on. Locks of Love will be able to cover many a chemo patient's heads with Jihadi facial hair. If The Donald swoops in at the last minute and has his own Iwo Jima moment atop Mt. Takfiri...I'll be humming, "America, fuck yeah..." Other than you see more ME chaos past the liberation of Syria? I don't.

- special prosecutor for Hillary (that will really unify the country)

I can't be the only one here who thinks that's a great idea. For once in America: transparency and accountability. Maybe Trump can get the trial on his new network?

- And oh yea, go after China for currency manipulation which ended over 4 years ago, and some nonsense they've "stolen our jobs". More 100% wrong in this then could be addressed in 10k words (US investors sent our "enterprises" there for cheap labor and to avoid costly environmental regs. A.. "business" decision.)

Unlike, for instance, the Saker, who has posted that China is a reasonable ally, I have my suspicions. I seriously doubt that China had nothing to do with wooing our industry away from us or rigging the game, so to speak. There are treacherous American dogs in business, no doubt. Why does it not make sense to penalize American companies that show no nationalism/patriotism in their practices. I don't think the American people would disagree with this assertion. Is Dr. Stein a proponent of globalism? (rhetorical)

Please don't ever, EVER, mention SNL again. Please.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Oct 30 2016 22:12 utc | 74

@NemesisCalling | Oct 30, 2016 3:11:26 PM | 47

I do believe that Trump is a safer candidate than Clinton, but he is still seriously flawed. He stands out as a peace candidate next to Clinton, but he still makes statements about bombing ISIS and their family members. Two war crimes in that statement seeing as the US is in Syria illegally. He also wants to increase the defense budget... WTF, it's already more than half of the federal discretionary spending. His choice of Pence is also a huge warning sign.

Stein is the only candidate that I have heard make a rational statement regarding Syria... stop sending in more weapons. I'll concede that I may be naive, but as a true outsider she has the best chance to rein in the military. We could discuss the deep state and who calls the shots, but at point it wouldn't matter who gets elected.

Baraka's Soros connection should be considered, but let's not forget that Rothschild helped bailout Trump with his casino. I'm also very concerned about his dealings and potential ties with organized crime.

But what about mass surveillance and privacy? The legalization of marihuana, especially at a time when 55 veterans commit suicide a day and are being denied benefits if they use cannabis instead being pumped up with drugs that make their condition worse. Or single payer health care, at a time when we know Obama-care was a neoliberal giveaway to insurance companies, and when we also know that for profit healthcare does not work.

The economy is a dead man walking, being held up by low interest rates and money printing that goes right into the stock market and other bubbles. The reported unemployment rate is completely false, and the GDP is constantly readjusted down months later. When the shit hits the fan, Clinton would sell our souls to the banks, and I'm not so sure Trump would have the fortitude to do otherwise. He might talk like a populist, but in this regard I'm not sure he would do anything different. Jill Stein at least has a jobs program that makes sense to me.

This is one election that people should be informed and vote for who would better represent them. Hell, if Trump had picked Jesse Ventura for vice president I would have no problem voting for him.

Posted by: Tobin Paz | Oct 30 2016 22:14 utc | 75

I think the possibility that there were "rogue" FBI investigators keeping Comey in the dark -- to create an "October surprise" -- may be the most significant (and scary) part of this story (if true) ... shades of the numerous other "rogue" factions we've seen under Obama ... see also the 50 anonymous state department dissenters to Obama's policies (obviously endorsing Hillary). I'm curious if they and this ruse will ever be mentioned again.

Another failure of the chain of command ... lack of respect for authority within the highest levels of government. I'm thinking some people understood the message in too many movies glorifying renegades and mavericks. This isn't whistleblowing because no one will listen, this is subverting the process because you didn't like the outcome ... will cheating and fabrication come next to these ideology driven zealots? Has it already?

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 22:21 utc | 76

that should have been "misunderstood" the message of too many movies ... shades of "the wild bunch" ... Watcha rebelling against? Whatcha got?

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 22:24 utc | 77

The Bezos’ Wapo rag is expected to be selective. Credibility destroyed. Now, with all the howling from The Clinton gang. The best display of what goes around, comes around! ……
Let’s recall 24 years ago the 11th hr indictment of Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger that doomed the re-election of president George H.W. Bush .

This was the weekend before the election!

Bill Clinton cheered 11th hour indictment that doomed Bush re-election

[24 years ago], as former President George H.W. Bush was surging back against challenger Bill Clinton, a special prosecutor raised new charges against Bush in the Iran-Contra probe, prompting Clinton to claim he was running against a "culture of corruption."

[.] Many Republicans claimed that the indictment made by special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh against former Reagan-era Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger the weekend before the 1992 election cost Bush a second term. The indictment, later thrown out, challenged Bush's claim that he did not know about a controversial arms-for-hostages deal that dogged the Reagan-Bush administration.”

[.]The Clintons seized on the new indictment, howling about a "culture of corruption" that supposedly pervaded the administration. Bush's poll numbers declined and Bill Clinton won the election.
Shortly after the election, a federal judge threw out the new indictment because it violated the five-year statute of limitations and improperly broadened the original charges. President Bush then pardoned Weinberger.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Speechless but I am not shocked.

Posted by: likklemore | Oct 30 2016 22:24 utc | 78

Well, who's to say what the FBI can or cannot do in terms of warrants or "investigative collateral damage" but it occurs to me that the e-mail controversy might well be put to sleep if we allow enough time for the FBI forensics team to decide there's nothing there after all. The growing traction in the media reveals some cracks in the dreadnought's hull. (wikileaks was not even acknowledged on major broadcasts, let alone Guccifer 1 & 2). Do we believe that it's Comey who's going back for the second bite at the apple? Seems unlikely. Even if there is a mutiny by FBI Special Agents who want their work to count for something, recent history suggests that revealing anything under whistleblower protection is a stupid idea. I'll raise a toast to any feds who may be lurking around the bar. Especially the anti-racketeering ones. If the smoking gun is found, it'll never see the light, right, fellas?

Posted by: stumpy | Oct 30 2016 22:30 utc | 79

Mildly off topic...

I'm huge baseball fan, been watching World Series. I watch little TV, but had not seen much in the way of PAC generated national ads on the networks for either candidate, and few I saw were pretty mild from both candidates.

This ad has been shown at least once each game (4 now). Trump had begun marginally closing the gap by late last week, before the latest Comey embroglio. I attribute this to that ad.

I'm sure the Trump supporters will love it, Hillary's will puke.

It's obviously done by real "Pros", know how to create a mood with lighting, "creative" editing and pasting together out of context statements and the like.

Reminds me of Swift Boat ads, smearing Gore as claiming he "Invented the Internet" ***(huge lie, for those familar but Rove was able to get it to stick), ads Rove ran against Mccain in 2000 when McCain was running on "D.C. being a cesspool", coming out of nowhere to beat bush in 2 early east coast primaries, then the (100% false) Rove ads in (if memory serves) Virginia & So. Carolina smearing McCain as having voted against Breast Cancer research. Restored "order" (McCain didn't win another primary) then his infamous "hug" promoting Bush... many thought (I sure did) that was a hug of a broken (by Rove machine) man.

Even going back to LBJ ads casting Goldwater as "can't wait" to nuke the world "Daisy" ads. Ironically in that one, (arguable) LBJ turned out to be the war-monger, much more so then Goldwater would have been.

Information on the sponsor PAC here.

*** I still find myself on occasion thinking what a different world we'd have had Gore been president. At minimum, would never have gone into Iraq & would be well on our way to renewable energy. I'd bet 9/11 would have never happened either.

Posted by: jdmckay | Oct 30 2016 22:38 utc | 80

@ 79 jdmckay

Are you sure Gore would not have gone into Iraq?

I used to think that too. I used to think a lot of things were true.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Oct 30 2016 22:55 utc | 81

@ Susan Sunflower 75

I think the possibility that there were "rogue" FBI investigators keeping Comey in the dark -- to create an "October surprise" -- may be the most significant (and scary) part of this story (if true) ... shades of the numerous other "rogue" factions we've seen under Obama ... see also the 50 anonymous state department dissenters to Obama's policies (obviously endorsing Hillary). I'm curious if they and this ruse will ever be mentioned again.

It’s called Mutiny in D.C. Comey’s hand was forced.

Is This Why Comey Broke: A Stack Of Resignation Letters From Furious FBI Agents

and, add this to the mix – I read an article on a credible site of a new bombshell but before I link to it, the contents should be confirmed during week of November 1st. However, this gem was included in the article:

“people at the Pentagon are aligned:
Will not silently sit still as one of their 4-Star generals get ramrodded for MUCH less than Hillary did. They are aligned with the insurrectionists at the FBI.

The general in question
Oct. 17, 2016 NYT
James Cartwright, Ex-General, Pleads Guilty in Leak Case,

(General Cartwright’s undoing)

“It was wrong for me to mislead the F.B.I. on Nov. 2, 2012, and I accept full responsibility for this,” General Cartwright said. “I knew I was not the source of the story and I didn’t want to be blamed for the leak. My only goal in talking to the reporters was to protect American interests and lives; I love my country and continue to this day to do everything I can to defend it.”

~ ~ ~ ~

Brace for more bombshells – up next, The Clinton Family Foundation.

Question of the day. Over half million emails on Weiner's computer, are the 33,000 deleted emails in this trove?

Posted by: likklemore | Oct 30 2016 23:10 utc | 82

The Washington Examiner has alt-right cachet ... so that may "fill in that checkbox" ... "everyone" was expecting an October Surprise from Breitart/Steve Bannon & Company.
Bannon was responsible for Weiner's first sexting scandal (during his mayoral campaign, which may have been actually the second for "locals").
The circumstances of these latest outing (exactly who outed him, why and when and to whom) seem murky except the sexting chat sessions had been going on for months and months, so his poor 15 year old "victim" had plenty of time to find someone interested in hearing (and documenting) her exchanges with her "new friend" ... (The way society has regressively infantalized teenagers truly shocks me ... and I think may be part of why college campuses are seem rife with behavior that should have dealt with while these young people were still in high school and living under their parents' roof -- end of rant)

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 30 2016 23:12 utc | 83

NemesisCalling @ 73


There, is this better?: he is the "stability candidate."

If he gets elected, I hope you're right. I sure don't see it, however. kind'a makes me wonder what your vision of "stability' is. :)

But the fact remains: Donald Trump is on the "stability side" of ME politics/chaos. And this is regardless of what he says about Iran and other multiple personality stances on the ME he painfully rambles on about.
Dr. Stein has sounded the alarms about pushing mandatory vaccines.

Actually, she didn't. Not a big deal now, but you should go back and read full statements she made, not reddit charactarizations etc. etc. She just didn't say that. Really. If you're as concerned as you say (put kids in private school) then do some reading. She just didn't say that.

Dr. Stein said:

On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary's policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.

Again, you need to read her entire statements. You said:

She has even conceded that Trump would be safer than Clinton.

She never said anything even close, only that fear of nuke hair-trigger (alone), Trump "trumps" HRC. As little coverage/discussion that Stein gets, please don't put words in her mouth she didn't say. Quote her, please don't characterize with bias.


Stein: following my assertion that Stein is an ethical candidate, and not a logical one,

Completely agree with "ethical", completely disagree ith "not logical"...

please prove me wrong that she would not be reneging on her humanitarian platform when she has to accelerate deportations to cool a crazed and angry populace.

I can't prove that. She's never said she would accellerate deportations, so she can't break that promise. BO by the way has accellerated deportations.

Stein's view on immigration problem: stop creating senseless wars generating refugees in the millions, and take well explained actions to both do that and a lot more. If you want more deportations, by all means vote for Trump.

Talking about "broken promises" however, even if he's elected I doubt Trump's wall will ever happen for a gazillion reasons, least of which is at best it will only slow down illegal immigration from Mexico minimally, and once they build their tunnels it will be back to normal.

Or slow down energy sector industry and not face vicious blowback.

Oh, that would be a fight allright. But you're calling that a "broken promise" before she gets out of the chute (if ever)... pretty presumptious IMO.

And your charactarization "slow down energy sector" utterly non-illuminating to point of obfuscation. If she had her way, energy section would be ramped up massively... just wouldn't be coal & NG: it would be renewables. Long over due. But you're right, that would be a big fight. But I sure as hell don't agree with your characterization of "broken promises" at all. Really... her "Green New Deal" is centerpiece of her platform. W/out it, I wouldn't vote for her.

Personally, I think it's one that has a fair chance, since the public has been so utterly bamboozled on just about everything that has to do with renewables or climate change... but that's another subject. She articulates it accurately as good as anyone I've heard. As a country, we've never had this conversation honestly. Really comes down to whether man made climate change is a reality or not, another honest conversation we haven't had. Our national conversation has amounted to little more then McKay's brief history of political ads I mentioned at #79 above.

It got bashed around a little here on this thread a bit, I and contrarians said our piece, I'll leave it there.

(snip/acknowledge ISIS etc., conversations for another day. All I'll say is Stein has talked about this an awful lot, and what she says it what I thought we needed long before I ever heard her. IMO takes some real deliberate, open minded non ideological thought to begin to consider what she's proposing. It's just too much "outside almost everyone's box" to have even reference right now.)

Please don't ever, EVER, mention SNL again. Please.
ROFL!!! (thx)

Anyway, welcome to MoA. There's a lot of good stuff here over time, B does a great job. Seems a little hiatus in this wonderful election season, but it's not the norm.

Posted by: jdmckay | Oct 30 2016 23:33 utc | 84

NemesisCalling @ 80

> Are you sure Gore would not have gone into Iraq?

Pretty much, yes... don't care to get into it. With all due respect, I think that's a nonsense article full of holes. Leave it at that.

Posted by: jdmckay | Oct 30 2016 23:38 utc | 85

Hahaha... Al Gore campaigning for Hillary, include Bernie Sanders and even the so call progressive Elizabeth Warren. Are we on the same wavelength?

Listen! Almost all Republicans, NeoCon, diehard warmongers will be voting for Hillary. Oops almost forgot GW bush and Barber Bush are on Hillary’s side but Michael Moore is voting for Trump.

The Democratic Party is a Warmonger party. Period! Vote out all Democrats.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Oct 30 2016 23:57 utc | 86

@Posted by: likklemore | Oct 30, 2016 7:10:05 PM | 81

Well, Cartright claims he didn't "leak" anything but was approached by reporters seeing confirmation and clarification/perspective ... I'm guessing the "real leaker" will be revealed ... will it be someone with loose-lips and no clearance for authorized knowledge of details shared?

It's hard to imagine what "bombshell" could involve the Family Foundation unless they's paying for the upkeep of Bill's baby-mamas and kiddy-farm ... would anyone care?

A Trump win would globally be like Brexit on super-steroids. Did you see wall street's tumble yesterday? I loathe Trump for all the elitist reasons ... but que sera, sera ... as Doris would say ....

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 31 2016 0:06 utc | 87

no, Moore's not voting for Trump ... that's Trump propaganda ... he's a past Green / Nader voter who just released a movie that described as a love-letter to Clinton ... I refuse to tell folks or criticize their choice ... your vote is none of my business. enjoy!

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 31 2016 0:13 utc | 88


For a schmuck that just moved to the ghetto (must be a sign of a great intelligence, no doubt), you have a lot of chutzpah lecturing everyone else on the "right" order of things. It seems to me that if you managed to learn to listen more and talk (write) less, you'd do yourself a huge favor.

Posted by: telescope | Oct 31 2016 0:14 utc | 89

There is another, rather adventurous accounting of the investigation. According to this transcript from a chat board, some anonymous analyst at the Bureau turned to the public, basically saying they can't do anything about the Clinton Foundation because the case is too big - it would mean taking on the totally implied government, and exposing deeds that they fear might lead to foreign declarations of war. He proceeded to ask the public instead to go after the Foundation. But after seeing this route did actually not work out, the people at the Bureau might have come up with plan B. This seems consistent; as long as you accept the assumption. The transcript is a bit hard to read, but the story rather thrilling, and definitely "se non è vero, è ben trovato".

You also might appreciate Bill Still's narration of the Phoenix incident with Loretta Lynch.

Posted by: persiflo | Oct 31 2016 0:16 utc | 90

@jdmckay | Oct 30, 2016 7:38:37 PM | 84

The Clinton administration was bombing Iraq three times a week during 1999 and 2000 at a cost of over $2 billion a year. Regardless of who the next president was going to be, I think you could make a strong case that they were going to war in Iraq. The war record of Clinton, followed by Bush, followed by Obama lends credence to this assumption. Note that the attack on Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001, less than a month after September 11. I'm not a military expert, but that seems incredibly quick. Bush hadn't even been president for a year.

Posted by: Tobin Paz | Oct 31 2016 0:21 utc | 91

The Clinton Family Foundation seems so slushy ... the funds are totally at the family's "discretion" and it's hard to imagine a genuine "scandal" The Foundation/CGI (Clinton Global Initiative) really only needs a credible "dissatified customer" with records saying they didn't get the quid-pro-quo what they paid for ... however, two credible above-reproach dissatisified customers each other would be better. I've figured someone like that exists (or even that one could have been created/manufactured for this purpose) ... however, it's the bridgeburning involved in going public ....

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Oct 31 2016 0:22 utc | 92

@juliana 55

NP! I didn't make it clear enough that, yes, deportation is down on the list. When did stopping war cease to be important to us, anyway? you know it's bad when Trump is the most sensible man in the room.


My whole thing is this: Donald Trump deserves some credit. He has effectively destroyed the GOP and, with any luck the neocons/zionist influence (which I am HOPING is the case). I know he has contradicted himself, but look around! Everyone is contradicting themselves this election. Up is down and down is up and the democrats are beating the war drums to hardly any objection! HOLY SHIT! To me this translates as the empire is falling apart from within, and Karl Grove's famous quote about them creating realities only to create new realities when the media catches up has fallen by the wayside.

Anyways...go Cubbies.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Oct 31 2016 0:23 utc | 93

@88 telescope | Oct 30, 2016 8:14:11 PM |
learn to listen more and talk (write) less, you'd do yourself a huge favor.

Hey Telescope, I think you are looking thru the wrong end of the instrument :-)

I read ChipNiks posts because they set me thinking in unexpected ways..
.. which some may find unsettling, but I appreciate...

Kudos to the cryptic semanticist

Posted by: DavidKNZ | Oct 31 2016 1:01 utc | 94

(!) According to a NYPD source, the emails on Weiner's laptop are NOT about state secrets, but are in fact pointing to a pedophilia ring with the Clintons at the center.

Looks like Bill wasn't alone on Epsteins Lolita Express. Hillary has a well documented preference for underage girls.

Look into
-Jared Fogle
-Cathy O'^Brien
-the 'Hillary Clinton Tapes'
-Tim Kaine (WikiLeaks, VP choice since 07.2015(!))


Posted by: PhobosMoon | Oct 31 2016 1:14 utc | 95

Her Majesty has a solution

Posted by: beq | Oct 31 2016 1:15 utc | 96

{quote} "Gormley took over as the new Green Party leader after the election and as the minister for environment, heritage and local government minister in the coalition government. Eamon Ryan, the current leader, became the minister for energy and communications. They respectively sold out the campaigns to save the historic Hill of Tara from a motorway bypass and the farmers and fishermen in County Mayo fighting oil giant Shell in the "Shell to Sea" campaign. They also acquiesced to the blasphemy law, leaving Ireland as the only country in Europe with such legislation.

"As the more radical members departed and the electorate became more disillusioned, the party was sucked further and further into the maw of the coalition. It ended up supporting the bailout measures for the corrupt Irish banks and signing up to the highest per capita debt payback terms in Europe. Unsurprisingly the election of 2011 left the party with no seats. It is now struggling to return to its pre-2007 levels of support and still has a long way to go." >> {end quote} -- Red Pepper Magazine

{quote} "The Czech Greens entered a similar Faustian pact with a right-wing party from 2007 to 2009. The fatal fault line in the Czech Republic was not the economy, nor the environment, where the party remained relatively true to its principles, but militarisation and the construction of "Star Wars" missile bases by the US aimed at Russia.

"Underlying all this was the fact that the party had been effectively taken over by a right-wing businessman, Martin Bursík, who overawed the membership with promises of funding and improvements in electoral methods. He delivered and the Greens entered government. At the European Green Party conference in Ljubljana, Slovenia, in 2008 he argued that the Green's natural allies were on the right and that connections with the peace movement were part of the historical baggage that needed to be jettisoned." {end quote} -- Red Pepper Magazine

What are the chances of the Greens disappointing their supporters if they get into government? High, if the experience of their sister parties elsewhere in Europe is anything to go by, suggests Joseph Healy:

Posted by: blues | Oct 31 2016 1:19 utc | 97

And... Hillary's "running mate":

DEVELOPING New headaches for VP nominee Tim Kaine as alleged mistress comes forward with tape of thr

Don't you want somebody to love.

(Maybe NOT Tim Kaine.)

Posted by: blues | Oct 31 2016 1:30 utc | 98

@Susan Sunflower | Oct 30, 2016 8:13:21 PM | 87

Excuse me, I never came across Michael direct statement he'll vote for Trump, I could be wrong. However, Michael Moore leaked in Zero Hedges (below) and spread to multiple websites. Searched few hrs and below results. Am I correct or wrong?

Michael Moore: "Trump's Election Will Be The Biggest Fuck You Ever Recorded In Human History"

Some fascinating comments from the overtly liberal, Hillary-supporting Michael Moore, who in a recently leaked speech comes perilously close in a speech explaining why on November 8, what is left of middle America will look to cast its vote for Donald Trump for one reason:

Americans might be penniless, they might be homeless, they might be fucked over and fucked up it doesn't matter....the name of the man who has threatened to upend and overturn the very system that has ruined their lives: Donald J Trump.

He concludes: Yes, on November 8, you Joe Blow, Steve Blow, Bob Blow, Billy Blow, all the Blows get to go and blow up the whole goddamn system because it's your right. Trump's election is going to be the biggest fuck ever recorded in human history and it will feel good.

Michael Moore is voting for Trump to say "F U" to the corrupt political system

Anonymous Poll = Trump will win by a LANDSLIDE!!!

Posted by: Jack Smith | Oct 31 2016 1:37 utc | 99

Tobin Paz @ 90

The Clinton administration was bombing Iraq three times a week during 1999 and 2000 at a cost of over $2 billion a year. Regardless of who the next president was going to be, I think you could make a strong case that they were going to war in Iraq.

Yes ($2b p/yr bombing), and as the Counterpunch article states plenty of Gore quotes to "make strong case".

My view: GWB admin "sold" Iraq to us not just because of WMD, but as response to declarations Sadaam was behind 9/11. Whole admin, Rice/Rummy/Cheney said this all the time, every where they could. Limbaugh, FOX... 24/7 saturation promoting this. I remember many "anonymous" quotes in Pentagon saying Rummy was running around after towers were hit saying "how can we tie this to Iraq".

Wolfowitz was "architect" of Iraq "liberation"... he'd been promoting this back to early PNAC days. Wolfy was too "nuts" even for Bush Sr., got canned early on in his admin. Throw in Feith, Elliot Abrams and the rest, GWB was surrounded with ultra neo-con, hard line Likud'niks who really didn't give a rip about the US. Iraq was about Israel's "security", and those guys had been writing about it for years.

None of them would have been in a Gore administration. And Gore's statements in CounterPunch, they do speak for themsleves. But I'm not sure he wasn't trying to just be a good soldier, let Junior have his way.

Another thing: Blix had full access in Iraq. Outside of US, he was highly regarded. Here, the 24/7 neo-con media machine I mentioned above never let up on Blix. He was a "low life" "old Europe" bureaucrat... it was brutal. Really, really 'animal farm' brutal.

Bush's UN "in your face" (either with us or against us) speech clearly designed to bully Security Counsel, Powell's "clear and convincing evidence" which was all bull shit & concocted by Cheney's office... none of this would have existed in Gore Whitehouse, and I'd put down a good bet Gore would have been very content to trust and allow Blix to finish his work. Gore just didn't have all these ulterior motives.

One of the most memorable things in my mind of single minded purpose driving Wolfowitz/Feith etc. and the sickness behind it... I don't recall the timeline precisely, but I think not long after Junior announced "mission accomplished", among other things Bremmer had a big press brew-haa-haa introducing their "occupying authority" new flag for their "liberated" Iraq: it was almost a replica of Israel's flag. I don't have links, but maybe others recall this. It was a big, nuclear power backed fuck-you to Iraq and the middle east saying "hey, what do you think of that m****er f***ers!!!!".

I can't imagine any of that from Gore. Bush was an entirely malleable, unaccomplished adolescent completely manipulated by the Likud neo-cons. Gore had clear ideas what he wanted to do (whatever one thinks about that) and didn't demonstrate any of Bush's reckless stupidity.

So anyway, really academic exercise now, but Gore never demonstrated the kind of utter non-sensical, insanely radical (I'd say christian based psychopathic behavior & words) that came out of GWB's mouth and his entire admin. I can't imagine these crazies would have had any presence whatsoever in his administration. And Gore's dedication and "sweat equity" towards Climate change and renewables... whatever people think of that, sure as hell wasn't borne from being bought-and-paid-for by the fossil fuel industry. GWB's admin was, top to bottom. Plenty of evidence to suggest getting Iraq's oil fields was big part of their calculus to "liberate".

So just academic at this point, but that's my own view FWIW.

Posted by: jdmckay | Oct 31 2016 1:43 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.