@ 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

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

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

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

“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

#9
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….
Pot/kettle..

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

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’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

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

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

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

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

@ 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

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

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

Here’s stuff you didn’t know about Trump. Not silly or salacious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60nOmmLtJSY

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

@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

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

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/10/30/491364/US-presidential-election-Donald-Trump-Hilalry-Clinton-polls-911
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:
http://www.halloween-mask.com/morb/09/hellary_m36465.jpg
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

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

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

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

@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

NemisisCalling@47
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

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.http://www.libertywritersnews.com/2016/10/breaking-obama-just-caught-trying-sabotage-new-clinton-email-investigation-sick/

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

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

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

46
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

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

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

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

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.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/why-hillary-is-disqualified-for-president/

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

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

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

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

@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 that…do 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

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

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
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/flashback-clinton-cheered-11th-hour-indictment-that-doomed-bush-reelection/article/2606000
[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

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

@ 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
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-30/why-comey-broke-stack-resignation-letters-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,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/us/marine-general-james-cartwright-leak-fbi.html?_r=0
(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

NemesisCalling @ 73
briefly…

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

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

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

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

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

@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

Her Majesty has a solution

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

And… Hillary’s “running mate”:
DEVELOPING New headaches for VP nominee Tim Kaine as alleged mistress comes forward with tape of thr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g95HySIhLrc
Don’t you want somebody to love.
(Maybe NOT Tim Kaine.)

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

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