Patterico's Pontifications

9/20/2016

Reddit Users Discover Potential New Evidence of Hillary Email Coverup

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:35 am



I don’t have time to fully explain this but Allahpundit has all the relevant details. Suffice it to say that a group research effort along the lines of what happened during Rathergate has uncovered some fairly compelling evidence that Hillary’s IT guy sought advice from Reddit users on how to scrub her email address from chains of emails.
Thank God we have the FBI around, as we can be confident they will fully investigate this new lead and take it wherever it goes. Yes, I’m joking of course.

182 Responses to “Reddit Users Discover Potential New Evidence of Hillary Email Coverup”

  1. the scooby gang on reddit, ‘if it wasn’t for those meddling kids’

    narciso (d1f714)

  2. oh for the love of canned cranberry sauce James Comey isn’t just corrupt he’s incompetently corrupt

    c’mon corrupt fbi poofterboi

    you had one job

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  3. Her e-mail address was scrubbed. On E-mail she appeared only a H – just that letter. No hdr22 and no clintonemail.com. Just H as the name.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  4. Oh, this is from Paul Combetta of Platte River Networks, and was from July 24, 2014 – which is just about when the Stgate Department first began asking for e-mails.

    The e-mail address he would have wanted to strip of replace was probably NOT that of Hillary Clinton. He wanted, probably, to avoid having e-mail to or from somebody included in the database of e-mail to be searched.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  5. no sammeh, the sender is who’s header they wanted to strip out,

    narciso (d1f714)

  6. Inspector Sammeh Clouseau… at your service!

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  7. Paul Combetta aka stonetear

    The issue is that these emails involve the private email address of someone you’d recognize, and we’re trying to replace it with a placeholder address as to not expose it.

    I don’t think that person is Hillary Clinton, unless he basically wants that in case they get hacked.

    He also writes

    I think maybe I wasn’t clear enough in the original post. I have these emails available in a PST file. Can I rewrite them in the PST? I could also export to MSG and do some sort of batch find/replace. Anyone know of tools that might help with this?

    Thia is definitely to avoid discovery.

    It’s not clear he got the answeer he was looking for.

    HOTAir explains exactly what the significance of the July 23, 2014 date is:

    On July 23, 2014, the House Select Committee on Benghazi had reached an agreement with the State Department on the production of [Hillary Clinton’s] records, according to an FBI report released earlier this month on the bureau’s probe of her email use…

    I responded right away is another important Hillary Clinton lie.

    Hillary Clinton got the State Department to make a different request later, from all fromer Secretaries of States since 1997.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  8. VDH, Nevernevertrump:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440198/never-nevertrump-not-voting-trump-republican-suicide

    In such a hysterical landscape, it was possible that no traditional Republican in 2016 was likely to win, even against a flawed candidate like Hillary Clinton, who emerged wounded from a bruising primary win over aged socialist Bernie Sanders.

    DNF (755a85)

  9. 5. Yes, the sender.

    I am not sure what this is about.

    The PSS files he’s talking about are a file he created for searching.

    I had the idea that he wanetd to exclude some e-mails fromthe search, and it’s somebody from outside the government who e-mailed Hillary Clinton. Maybe Sid Blumenhal – in which case maybe Combetta would be lying when he said it would be the e-mail addressofsomeone you’d recognize.

    But maybe this is talking about the e-mail address contained inside the chains. The released e-mail often comes from a different address than that quoted in the chains.

    Also: David Kendall claimed that Hillary Clinton had only used two e-mail addresses. They might want to hide a third one.

    If they wanted to strip out Hillary Clinton altogether , there’d be nothing left. One address It had already been published by Gawker in 2013.

    Another thing they did is limit the discovery to e-mail sent onto to or from *.gov (and maybe *.mil) addresses.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  10. 8. Cont.

    Yet for all Hillary’s hundreds of millions of corporate dollars and legions of Clinton Foundation strategists, she could never quite shake Trump, who at 70 seemed more like a frenzied 55. Trump at his worst was never put away by Hillary at her best, and he has stayed within six to eight points for most of his awful August and is now nipping her heels as October nears.

    DNF (755a85)

  11. On December 10, 2014 stonetear (7.Paul Combetta) wrote:

    http://archive.is/gZfRr

    Hello- I have a client who wants to push out a 60 day email retention policy for certain users. However, they also want these users to have a ‘Save Folder’ in their Exchange folder list where the users can drop items that they want to hang onto longer than the 60 day window.

    All email in any other folder in the mailbox should purge anything older than 60 days (should not apply to calendar or contact items of course). How would I go about this? Some combination of retention and managed folder policy?

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  12. http://completecolorado.com/pagetwo/2016/09/09/paul-combetta-may-have-stayed-tethered-to-clintons-through-legal-reimbursements/

    And according to an invoice obtained exclusively by Complete Colorado, all of the costs for travel, time spent on interviews, and legal assistance needed by that individual were possibly being paid for by the Clintons.

    If the Clintons were paying for Mr. Combetta’s time and travel, and especially if they were paying for any legal assistance he received through his employer, Denver-based Platte River Networks, it raises the question of how independent Mr. Combetta’s cooperation with the FBI was. Alternately, it could show he remained tethered, and therefore loyal to some degree, to Hillary Clinton and her team.

    In spite of his immunity, he wouldn’t testify at a Cngressional hearing a week ago.

    Bryan Pagliano didn’t even show up at all.

    Justin Cooper, the local SYSOP of Clintonemail.com, though, did agree to testify.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  13. Justin Cooper, the local SYSOP of Clintonemail.com, though, did agree to testify.
    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 9/20/2016 @ 8:44 am

    And why shouldn’t he? He’s in no legal peril. You have to have held a security clearance to know what your responsibilities are. And Cooper never had one. So no matter what happened, under the law he’s guiltless.

    Hillary! on the other hand, and screw Comey.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  14. well you can’t handle classified, noforn, gamma information without a clearance right?

    narciso (d1f714)

  15. Same goes for the Federal Records Act. Unless you are a federal employee charged with maintaining federal records, you can’t possibly violate it.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  16. narciso @16, you can. But unless you’ve been read in you can’t know what you’re looking at.

    Hillary! was read in, not her sysadmin.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  17. You’d be amazed how “I don’t recall” doesn’t work in an actual court martial.

    Or, maybe you wouldn’t.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  18. I’ve seen enough episodes of jag, to realize that.

    narciso (d1f714)

  19. Uh-oh. Someone is about to commit suicide by shooting themself 3 times inthe back of their head!!

    IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses (c18c1f)

  20. that would entail shame or guilt, you have to be selfaware for that,

    narciso (d1f714)

  21. Maybe I’m slow, but even if Hillary! loses I don’t think der Donald can force the FBI to investigate her crimes, or the DoJ to prosecute them. She doesn’t even effin’ need a pardon.

    I honestly don’t get it. The Clinton’s lie a lot, they’ve been lying for years, but they’re not good at it. Of course. No Clinton has ever had to be good at. They have always gotten away with lying badly, so why sharpen your skills? But this guy? What was his motivation for aiding and abetting?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  22. How do the Clintons attract so many willing accomplices? There’s no freaking star power there.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  23. Maybe I’m slow, but even if Hillary! loses I don’t think der Donald can force the FBI to investigate her crimes, or the DoJ to prosecute them. She doesn’t even effin’ need a pardon.

    Steve57 (0b1dac) — 9/20/2016 @ 9:33 am

    WHAT?! Trump’s Attorney General can’t decide to prosecute someone? Trump’s FBI appointee can’t decide what to investigate?

    How far out in space can NeverTrumps get?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  24. Gerald, I think a normal human being could receive what I’m transmitting. Yes, Trump can havTre
    an appointee order a prosecution. But unless Trump can weed out the Lois Lerners nothing is going to happen. The actual prosecutor will throw the case, Moseby style.

    Is this really beyond your comprehension?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  25. Gerald demonstrates we have exactly the government we deserve.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  26. .24 Willing accomplices = grifters, ideologues and pension pigs. The last group perhaps not so much willing, more like trough feeding cowards.

    Matador (5c0578)

  27. They’ll hang this guy out to dry, claim he’s the mastermind behind Hillary’s email scheme and poor innocent Hillary who just wanted to use her one Blackberry and is confused by multiple devices and thinks you wipe a server with a cloth had no knowledge of what he was up to.

    And then the press will say old news, justice done, OJ caught the real killers, let’s move on to Donald Jr’s boob toast and Skittles, which are the real threats to national security.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  28. @Steve57: unless Trump can weed out the Lois Lerners nothing is going to happen. The actual prosecutor will throw the case, Moseby style.

    You’re totally right this is a possibility, which is why I think the #NeverTrump panty-bunching about libel laws and whatnot is so overwrought.

    There is, however, a good chance that if Hillary doesn’t win then the Clintons are done as a political force. The Clinton Foundation money will stop coming in, and people working in government will have no reason to do them any favors, since they will have no probability of having to work for them.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  29. The bureaucracy will be no more loyal to Trump, they may transfer their loyalties to Obama’s people or something.

    But I don’t think anyone will be covering for the Clintons any more, if Hillary loses; why would Obama’s people stick their necks out for her when she can;t do them any good?

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  30. Unions, Gabriel.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  31. I got a feeling Obama people would not need to worry about that dilemma. Trump doing nothing to H once he got into office is perhaps the only salient point of agreement had in the famous Bill-Donald meeting in May 2015. So long as he won, that would be punishment enough on a lady monster not long for the world. That and not say a commitment not to lead Obamacare-to-single-payer conversion in that convo will definitely sink the Clinton name in infamy in left circles.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  32. @Steve57:Unions, Gabriel.

    Ok, there are government unions. Why would they stick out their necks to cover up for Hillary after she can’t do anything for them? Or would they hang her out to dry and stick to the followers of Obama?

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  33. Give me a break. Are you really this naive? They’ll cover for the Clintons because the unions and the Democrats are joined at the hip. It’s the natural order of things.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  34. You’re totally right this is a possibility, which is why I think the #NeverTrump panty-bunching about libel laws and whatnot is so overwrought.

    Libel laws affect government officials, politicians, the rich and the famous, and journalists. That’s true. But they also affect everyday people, both online and in real life.

    I think it’s a mistake to think that significantly changing these laws as Trump wants to do is not a concern. It’s not the biggest concern in this election by any means, but it indicates an intellectual shallowness by Trump (as well as Hillary-level selfishness) that is troubling because it suguests he doesn’t really understand the American legal system. And like it or not, if you want to change how government works, you have to understand how the legal system works.

    How can Trump fix a system he doesn’t understand?

    DRJ (15874d)

  35. @Steve57: They’ll cover for the Clintons because the unions and the Democrats are joined at the hip.

    They are joined at the hip because they can do favors for each other, not out of sentiment. Who is being naive here? And there are Democrats with juice, and Democrats without. What favors are they doing for Jimmy Carter or John Edwards these days?

    They are purely self-interested. If the Clintons have no prospect of returning to power, they will abandoned in favor of those who are loyal to Obama and are in the government now. And the Obamas aren’t going to do anything for someone as big a liability as Hillary Clinton will be by then.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  36. “…even against a flawed candidate like Hillary Clinton, who emerged wounded from a bruising primary win over aged socialist Bernie Sanders.”

    “Aged” like fine suet.

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  37. You do realize that Trump wants to change the libel laws to make it very hard to criticize him and other important people, right?

    He wants to protect the Trumps, the Gates, the Bezos, the Boehners, the McConnells, the Ryans, the Clintons, and Pelosis of the world. He wants to keep people who don’t approve of politicians and the famous from saying anything. Is that a good way to fix the system? I don’t see how it helps.

    DRJ (15874d)

  38. @DRJ:I think it’s a mistake to think that significantly changing these laws as Trump wants to do is not a concern.

    Trump has no power to change these laws with word from his royal mouth. And if you, DRJ, through no desire of your own, become a public figure, anyone can say pretty much anything about you that they like with no consequences. That’s what Trump, and a lot of others, object to.

    How can Trump fix a system he doesn’t understand?

    No one can fix it. Ted Cruz couldn’t fix it either. A President makes changes by who he appoints and how those people enforce regulations.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  39. nevertrumpers only belieber Mr. Trump is gonna do stuff when they think it makes him look bad if it’s good stuff they be all like he’s a LIAR who will break his promise

    they’re very consistent about this

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  40. @DRJ:You do realize that Trump wants to change the libel laws to make it very hard to criticize him and other important people, right?

    Yes, and he is running against someone who has pledged to appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn a ruling about a movie that criticized her.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  41. @DRJ: Quite aside from Citizens United, he is running against someone who has the loyalty of an IRS that already punishes people who criticize the Democrat establishment.

    Trump’s dangerousness to democracy is hypothetical. He has never held any office. Hillary Clinton’s willingness to abuse office is already demonstrated.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  42. i love Mr. Trump he’s tender as the night when I hold my baby tight but stinkypig us the exact opposite

    god i hate her

    we should all get together and vote against that pig

    boy wouldn’t that be something

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  43. oops stinkypig *is* the exact opposite i mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  44. #ShakingPomPomsForHillary!

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  45. @DRJ: Not trying to talk you out of your position. Pointing out that reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes the greatest threat. I think the country can recover from Trump. Despite what you accuse me of, I am not a “supporter” of Trump. I make the case only that he is by far the lesser of two evils. YMMV.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  46. Those who believe their subterfuge is not transparent should disabuse themselves of that notion.

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  47. “You do realize that Trump wants to change the libel laws to make it very hard to criticize him and other important people, right?”

    Perhaps they should ban him from running for office!?!?

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  48. “You’re deplorable. You’re irredeemable. With a wave of her limp, clammy hand, this sick old woman dismisses you from the company of those whose opinions have value, whose interests matter, who have any moral claim to participation in self-governance. You are less than nothing. You are vermin to be, at best, driven from society. Will Hillary Clinton ever be your president? No, and she makes no excuses and offers no denials that a Hillary Clinton presidency means the division of the country into those people she considers worthy and those people she does not.”

    — Kurt Schlichter

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  49. How do the Clintons get so much help?
    I think it is eerily akin to Voldemort.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  50. And if you, DRJ, through no desire of your own, become a public figure, anyone can say pretty much anything about you that they like with no consequences. That’s what Trump, and a lot of others, object to.

    TheRe are consequences if they speak with actual malice. It is hard to prove but the alternative is a rule that would substantially chill speech, and we need to be able to criticize the Trumps and the Clintons.

    If you advocate that people shoukd vote for Trump, you are a Trump supporter.

    DRJ (15874d)

  51. he is running against someone who has the loyalty of an IRS that already punishes people who criticize the Democrat establishment.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 10:32 am

    Can you make up your mind?

    When you’re talking to me, you tell me the bureaucrats aren’t going to stick their necks out for the Clintons. Yet here you are, saying exactly what I’ve been saying. They’ll be loyal to the the Clintons. What are you arguing with me about?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  52. Cockeyed and Painful…

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cs0KPsxUkAAhp4-.jpg

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  53. The Clintons have a massive war chest and Chelsea. Anybody who thinks that if Hillary! loses that means the Clintons are done is a fool.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  54. @14 14.Cernovich doesn’t say the immunity deal is off. He’s just saying it doesn’t apply to that. Immunity only applies to testmony.

    Of course the best thing in that case, would to to mention everything in his testimony when he is immunized, because the Oliver North case shows information learned from testimony and information learned from other sources can’t really be disentangled. At least the courts have so ruled. “Use immunity” is really equivalent to just plain immunity. BY rights he should have taken full advantage of it, but undoubtably Bill and Hillary were paying for his lawyers, directly or indirectly.

    FBI Director Louis Freeh, the man appointed to replace William Sessions, whom Clinton fired on trumped up ethics charges, was once asked in the 1990s had he ever before seen something like what happened in an investigation of the Clintons. He said yes, to the surprise of the member of Congress asking the question. When did he see it? In organized crime cases. And Freeh actually helped cover up things.

    What Combetta might be caught up on is some form of obstruction of a subpoena, although things hadn’t yet reached the point of a subpoena. Maybe not too serious for him, in any case, if he tells who was responsible.

    Combetta has also refused to testify about what took place in a conversation with Hillary Clinton’s lawyer, invoking attorney client privilege. He had to be told by his lawyer to do so. But that privilege belogs to the client, not the lawyer. He was answering questions under immunity!

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  55. @Steve57:Can you make up your mind?

    There’s no contradiction. Hillary didn’t lose the election yet. This isn’t hard.

    I’m saying if she loses, the favors she can do come to an end, and there’s no reason to do favors for her. Since she hasn’t lost yet, she might yet be their boss.

    The Clintons have a massive war chest and Chelsea.

    Worked for Jeb.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  56. Voting is like commenting on a blog. It probably doesn’t make much difference but it makes you feel better.

    I encourage everyone to vote for Trump or Hillary or whoever your conscience tells you to vote for. I am going to feel good about my Presidential vote for Ted Cruz.

    DRJ (15874d)

  57. @DRJ:TheRe are consequences if they speak with actual malice.

    Refer to Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. And good luck proving malice.

    If you advocate that people shoukd vote for Trump, you are a Trump supporter.

    I would put it as, I advocate voting for the Republican candidate in the presidential election as the one most likely to deny Hillary the Presidency.

    But you cast me into outer darkness if you like.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  58. Steve57 (0b1dac) — 9/20/2016 @ 10:53 am

    TO: Gabriel Henna

    When you’re talking to me, you tell me the bureaucrats aren’t going to stick their necks out for the Clintons. Yet here you are, saying exactly what I’ve been saying. They’ll be loyal to the the Clintons. What are you arguing with me about? Two different cases.

    If she loses, he thinks they won’t stick their necks out for the Clintons, and will let her be prosecuted and put in jail maybe. If she wins, they’ll be loyal to the the Clintons and will help her punish people who criticize her, and maybe put them in jail.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  59. Bad formatting.

    Take two.

    When you’re talking to me, you tell me the bureaucrats aren’t going to stick their necks out for the Clintons. Yet here you are, saying exactly what I’ve been saying. They’ll be loyal to the the Clintons. What are you arguing with me about?

    Two different cases.

    If she loses, he thinks they won’t stick their necks out for the Clintons, and will let her be prosecuted and put in jail maybe.

    If she wins, they’ll be loyal to the the Clintons and will help her punish people who criticize her, and maybe put them in jail.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  60. @Sammy Finkelman: Yes, that is what I said. Don’t know why it’s hard for Steve57.

    There’s no sentiment or honor at work here. Loyalty to the Clintons is mercenary.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  61. Yes, there’s a contradiction, Gabriel. You’re being deliberately obtuse if you’re pretending there isn’t. Until the Clintons are cold in the grave they’ll have the loyalty of the federal employee union members. Or, until the rent seekers stop giving to their foundation.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  62. @Sammy Finkleman: Hillary said today that “We also know from what the former head of our Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Matt Olson, that the kinds of rhetoric and language that Mr. Trump has used is giving aid and comfort to our adversaries.”

    Maybe she’ll have him tried for treason. That’s the language from the Constitution defining treason.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  63. If Trump wins, among the consequences mentioned by a columnist, is that Hillary Clinton will become the most hated person in America.

    She’ll be hated by both Democrats and Republicans. Hated by Democrats, for, among other things, making Trump president. They won’t forgive her for that.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  64. @Steve57:You’re being deliberately obtuse if you’re pretending there isn’t.

    I think you need to look up “contradiction”. You are saying that what I believe to be true is not true. That has nothing to do with “contradiction”. I’m not contradicting myself. I’m disagreeing with you.

    Until the Clintons are cold in the grave they’ll have the loyalty of the federal employee union members.

    You have no evidence for this.

    Or, until the rent seekers stop giving to their foundation.

    Here you concede my point. Why would rent seekers give money to people who cannot award them rent? They’ll switch to Organizing For America or whatever it’s called.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  65. And who told Matt Olson to say that?

    Besides, by “our adversaries” didn’t Matt Olson mainly mean Vladimir Putin?

    Terrorists are our enemy, not our “adversary.”

    Can someone find the original Matt Olson quote?

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  66. If she loses, Hillary Clinton will begin planning for 2020.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  67. @Sammy Finkleman: Hillary said today that “We also know from what the former head of our Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Matt Olson, that the kinds of rhetoric and language that Mr. Trump has used is giving aid and comfort to our adversaries.”

    Maybe she’ll have him tried for treason. That’s the language from the Constitution defining treason.
    I
    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 11:16 am

    I am not saying you’ve staked out a position here, but the this is a pet peeve of mine. Hillary! and the truth have the same relationship as Dracula and the crucifix. It’s only been policy that telling the truth about Islam is giving “aid and comfort to the enemy” since we elected our first post-American, anti-American preezy.

    We’ll be a lot better off when we stop lying. Ask me how.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  68. She has to, to maximize her chances of staying out of jail, for the reasons Steve57 cited.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  69. Here you concede my point. Why would rent seekers give money to people who cannot award them rent? They’ll switch to Organizing For America or whatever it’s called.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 11:19 am

    No, I’m not conceding any points. What was it, $600k for 12 minutes of air time, says you’re wrong.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  70. As I said above, I think you should vote for the candidate of your choice, Gabriel. I did not “cast yout into outer darkness.” I think you said earlier you are overwrought and I agree. Why is that?

    DRJ (15874d)

  71. Steve57 (0b1dac) — 9/20/2016 @ 11:26 am

    Hillary! and the truth have the same relationship as Dracula and the crucifix.

    Which means you should realize that Hillary Clinton may be lying about what exactly Matt Olsson said.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  72. I also said above that proving actual malice is hard, but the alternative is worse. Are you trying to be argumentative or is this the normal you?

    DRJ (15874d)

  73. Sammy @73, unfortunately she’s not. Everyone likely not to say stupid s*** has been purged.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  74. 73. Of course, maybe not exactly lying in a way to be given four Pinocchios – just using a careful choice of words, like mentioning Matt Olson’s former job as head of the National Counterterrorism Center, to make Matt Olsson appear to have said something he didn’t quite say.

    I’d check it out before assuming Matt Olsson really said that Donald Trump rhetoric about Moslems. I suspect it would turn out he was talking about praise for Putin.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  75. @DRJ:I also said above that proving actual malice is hard, but the alternative is worse.

    In your opinion. Someone who disagrees with your cost-benefit analysis is not necessarily an advocate for fascism.

    I think you said earlier you are overwrought and I agree. Why is that?

    I was overwrought in my response to an entirely different post. I was not saying I am overwrought 100% of the time.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  76. Check it out.

    And not everybody needs to be purged and not ever position nees to be filled with a timeserver or whatever.

    If only one out of three former appointees is willing to say stupid s*** that’s enough.

    But I think a person may feel that he has his own reputation to maintain, so he is unlikely to say something that stupid as Hillary is trying to make him out to have said.

    Somebody find the original quotation.

    Sammy Finkelman (dec35d)

  77. @Sammy Finkelman:She has to, to maximize her chances of staying out of jail, for the reasons Steve57 cited.

    That’s what Jacque Chirac had to do!

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  78. Not surprising…

    “SOMETHING THAT CAN’T GO ON FOREVER, WON’T: Blockbuster NYT Report Exposes Public Pension Charade. “America’s public pension funds, which manage trillions of dollars in retirement assets for millions of civil servants, are systematically deceiving taxpayers, the politicians, and municipal bond investors with elaborate accounting sleight-of-hand. The ‘official’ numbers show that public pension funds are struggling; the accurate ones show that the looming fiscal time bomb is so explosive that it may be impossible to defuse.”

    I feel pretty confident that any proposed fix will involve taking money from me and giving it to Democratic constituencies.”

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/244319/

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  79. @Sammy:If she loses, Hillary Clinton will begin planning for 2020.

    I don’t doubt it. I don’t doubt Napoleon was planning future campaigns from St Helena, either. But those were never going to come into reality, and I don’t think the Clintons will have any juice any more if she loses.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  80. Larry Sabato Shifts a Raft of Senate Race Predictions, All Towards the Republicans
    —Ace

    Read it and giggle like a lunatic.

    Three “Leans Democrat” have become “Toss Up,” one “Leans Republican” becomes “Safe Republican.”

    Check out Ohio, where “Leans Democrat” has flipped to “Leans Republican.”

    And a lot of “Likely Democrat” seats have shifted to “Leans Democrat.”

    Wow, Trump is really destroying this party.”

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/365913.php

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  81. @Sammy: I don;t really care if Olson used the words “aid and comfort”. Hillary used them. She accused Donald Trump of treason. Maybe she’ll charge him with it if elected.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  82. Olsen said what he said, Sammy. The same people who told us we couldn’t possibly know what was going on at Benghazi when we had at least two SEALs trained in Special Reconnaissance standing on top of the objective are now telling us about Islam.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  83. @Colonel Haiku:Wow, Trump is really destroying this party.

    Of course he is! Its appeal is much less selective than it was. Lot less tony than it used to be. Ask T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII. Or George H. W. Bush, if the rumors are true.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  84. Huh, know what’s even better than the treason accusation? That it was teed up be a reporter for Bloomberg!

    “Are you concerned that this weekend’s attacks or potential incidents in the coming weeks might be an attempt by ISIS or ISIS sympathizers, or really any other group, maybe the Russians, to influence the presidential race in some way, and presumably try to drive votes to Donald Trump, who is, as you’ve said before, widely seen as perhaps being somebody who they would be more willing to—or see as an easier person to be against?”

    Yeah, that’s plausible, ISIS is killing Americans only so they’ll elect Trump. Don’t vote for Trump or the terrorists will have won!

    That’s even better than “Don’t vote for Trump or this vet will cry.”

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  85. Not to mention having it both ways: they think Trump will be easier to work with AND more likely to fight them!

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  86. @narcsicso: I’m not seeing that security keys were posted. He posted the IP address, that’s not security information. That’s like a phone number.

    Yes, maybe you don’t want your phone number listed but anyone can dial random digits and call you. Your phone number is inherently not secret.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  87. narciso, Hillary! chooses her confidantes for their loyalty, not their competence.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  88. Gerald, I think a normal human being could receive what I’m transmitting. Yes, Trump can havTre
    an appointee order a prosecution. But unless Trump can weed out the Lois Lerners nothing is going to happen. The actual prosecutor will throw the case, Moseby style.

    Is this really beyond your comprehension?

    Steve57 (0b1dac) — 9/20/2016 @ 9:56 am

    Actually, the prosecutors are appointed by the President.

    While we’re on the subject of the DOJ and the staff lawyers, the Obama DOJ has reportedly utterly politicized the hiring there so that they have exclusively hired leftists. Do you think possibly Trump’s AG could do something about that? Or is that somehow beyond the power of the AG as well?

    At least one NeverTrump here suggested recently that nothing can actually be done about anything anyway, because it’s all too far gone or something. Was that you?

    But one NeverTrump narrative here is that Trump may turn out to be utterly indistinguishable from Clinton. Presumably that includes appointees. Yes we can hope he’ll be different but we have absolutely no idea what he’ll do. IOW maybe he’ll appoint another Eric Holder for all we know.

    Gerald A (76f251)

  89. @Gerald A:Do you think possibly Trump’s AG could do something about that? Or is that somehow beyond the power of the AG as well?

    It’ll be made a scandal, like under Bush. He’s firing people for POLITICAL REASONS!!!111!11

    At least one NeverTrump here suggested recently that nothing can actually be done about anything anyway, because it’s all too far gone or something. Was that you?

    May have been me, but I’m #NeverHillary.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  90. 39.You do realize that Trump wants to change the libel laws to make it very hard to criticize him and other important people, right?

    And his kid has got it in for Skittles, too!

    Pshaw!

    What next– the deportation of Peanut M&M’s?!!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  91. did you know they make oreo churros

    it’s true

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  92. It’ll be made a scandal, like under Bush. He’s firing people for POLITICAL REASONS!!!111!11 Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 1:29 pm

    I remember that. Excellent point.

    felipe (023cc9)

  93. When they aren’t under teh boot, they’re at your throat.

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  94. but razorback can purge everybody and their second cousin, it doesn’t even rise to the level of a doublestandard,

    narciso (d1f714)

  95. @narcisco:but razorback can purge everybody and their second cousin, it doesn’t even rise to the level of a doublestandard,

    A double standard is actually a covert single standard.

    It’s not okay to fire AGs, if you have an R after your name, and it’s okay if you have a D after your name. The double standard on firing AGs is really a single standard of what letter you have after your name.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  96. Or staring crosseyed into deep space…

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  97. “The researchers are on the tiny Greek island of Antikythera, a 10-minute boat ride from the wreckage of a 2,000-year-old merchant ship. Discovered by sponge divers in 1900, the wreck was the first ever investigated by archaeologists. Its most famous bounty to date has been a surprisingly sophisticated clockwork device that modelled the motions of the Sun, Moon and planets in the sky — dubbed1 the ‘Antikythera mechanism’.

    But on 31 August this year, investigators made another groundbreaking discovery: a human skeleton, buried under around half a metre of pottery sherds and sand. “We’re thrilled,” says Brendan Foley, an underwater archaeologist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, and co-director of the excavations team. “We don’t know of anything else like it.”

    PotteryBarn Man?

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  98. Actually, the prosecutors are appointed by the President.

    Gerald A (76f251) — 9/20/2016 @ 1:19 pm

    No, they’re not. Now a special prosecutor is, well, special.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  99. funny, Col.

    mg (31009b)

  100. @100. A grave concern. Mankind is dying to know more…

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  101. @Sammy Finkelman:She has to, to maximize her chances of staying out of jail, for the reasons Steve57 cited.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 11:41 am

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 11:41 am
    That’s what Jacque Chirac had to do!

    You’re talking about his run for re-election in 2002 (when the presidential term was reduced to 5 year) He was actually officially immune to prosecution while president, a contention upheld by a court in 1999.

    He did not run for re-election in 2007. Jacques Chirac still managed to stay out of jail
    He received a two-year suspended prison sentence in December, 2011.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Chirac

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  102. Yeah, no one ever learned anything from looking at old bones. And every bit of human knowledge can be immediately judged useful to know, or not useful to know immediately when it is proposed.

    And it’s not like we’re commenting on this using machines that are only possible to build because of some theoretical work done in 1894 because someone wanted to know why things change color when they got hot.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  103. Matt Olsson was talking about what trump said about Russia, not terrorism, and specifically the “request” that they hack Hillary’s e-mails..

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/donald-trump-russia-foreign-policy-226340

    “The invitation to Russia to hack a presidential candidate’s email messages is stunning and reckless,” said Matt Olsen, a former director of the National Counterterrorism Center. “To the extent our adversaries take this seriously, it presents a threat to the integrity of our electoral process and our national security. “

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  104. Or maybe there’s something else?

    Theer was this:

    http://time.com/4480945/isis-donald-trump/

    . Interviews with ISIS members and analysis of social media, including in a recent Foreign Affairs article by Mara Revkin and Ahmad Mhidi, make it clear: “ISIS is rooting for Trump.”

    …By demonizing Muslims, he feeds ISIS’s narrative that the U.S. is at war with Islam

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  105. So this was somethinmg he wrote in co-ordination with the Clinton campaign just recently.

    Still, not the same words.

    She’s combining differenthings he said or wrote.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  106. Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 2:32 pm

    Let it go. Besting a fool is no accomplishment.

    felipe (023cc9)

  107. I hope Hoagie is alright.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  108. I do, too, Steve57!

    felipe (023cc9)

  109. Let us say the Our Father for Hoagie (two words per Christian – are you ashamed?), I will start:

    Our Father…

    felipe (023cc9)

  110. Surely you jest, felipe.

    Mark 8

    38For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in His Father’s glory with the holy angels.”

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  111. 77. @DRJ:I also said above that proving actual malice is hard, but the alternative is worse.

    In your opinion. Someone who disagrees with your cost-benefit analysis is not necessarily an advocate for fascism.

    I think you said earlier you are overwrought and I agree. Why is that?

    I was overwrought in my response to an entirely different post. I was not saying I am overwrought 100% of the time.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 9/20/2016 @ 11:40 am

    I never said you had to agree with me. I simply expressed my opinion. In addition, I certainly never called you a fascist, nor did I imply it or think it.

    I’d say you are definitely overwrought.

    DRJ (15874d)

  112. Done and done, felipe.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  113. Steve57 (0b1dac) — 9/20/2016 @ 3:08 pm

    You have never disappointed me, Steve 57 – when I grow up, I want to be at least half as brave as you, but; I do not speak for Jesus. Type two words, brother in Christ.

    felipe (023cc9)

  114. Col Haiku,

    Maybe Trump is helping the GOP Senators but they are polling better than Trump, which suggests that they are succeeding on their own or people are ticket-splitting because they want a divided government. Maybe Trump will make a difference. We’ll see.

    DRJ (15874d)

  115. I’m in with a prayer for Hoagie.

    DRJ (15874d)

  116. Steve, we cross posted. you ARE a good man.

    felipe (023cc9)

  117. …I’d say you are definitely overwrought.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/20/2016 @ 3:08 pm

    Concur.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  118. DRJ, you are my big sister.

    felipe (023cc9)

  119. Hey, Steve, one of my comments is in moderation because I called you a good man! How cool, is that?

    felipe (023cc9)

  120. you can’t detract from Mr. Trump

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  121. illary can’t become the next President.
    There’s only one way we can prevent that …

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  122. https://twitter.com/ANONAMERICANHQ/status/778267624937512960

    That’s the thing about these legal dilly-o’s, the greater political environment can, quite often, change the personal calculations at the drop of a hat.

    Dystopia Max (76803a)

  123. felipe @116 where did you get the idea I am brave? Has that been the impression you think I’ve been trying to make all these years?

    I had the privilege of knowing brave men. Like Gunny Hathcock.

    By the way, next month is the anniversary of the the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

    I plan on holding services. Loud and long.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  124. @ Mr. Hanna (#43), who wrote this among a great many other comments, but this is the one that I have the greatest substantive quibble with:

    Trump’s dangerousness to democracy is hypothetical. He has never held any office. Hillary Clinton’s willingness to abuse office is already demonstrated.

    The second and third sentences here are undoubtedly true, and I agree even that they’re important. But the first sentence isn’t true: The person who pays the bribe is a threat to democracy, just like the person who takes the bribe. Both Clinton and Trump are demonstrably corrupt, it’s just that they cover both sides of the process instead of just the insider/public-“servant” side.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  125. felipe,

    I could probably be your grandmother but I love that kind of flattery.

    DRJ (15874d)

  126. Anyone who has served, is brave, in my book!

    felipe (023cc9)

  127. Colonel,

    Is it Trump or outside money making the difference?

    DRJ (15874d)

  128. If Mr. Trump were a danger to democracy I’d be the first to say omfg this is no good.

    But nope.

    Keep your eyes on that pig. She’s the dangerous one boy howdy sancho panza.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  129. bayh like his father before him the one quayle took down, is less of a catch, than one expected,

    narciso (d1f714)

  130. I could probably be your grandmother but I love that kind of flattery.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/20/2016 @ 3:37 pm

    I doubt you can be my grandmother and I’m sure you are beautiful. Maybe someday I’ll make you a Zabaglione.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  131. This is my lucky blogging day. Thanks, guys!

    DRJ (15874d)

  132. Not kidding about the Zabaglione, DRJ. You have to share it with somebody.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  133. @Beldar: Both Clinton and Trump are demonstrably corrupt,

    True enough, but there’s a huge difference in degree. Perhaps not by your lights.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  134. We’ll all need to be brave if illary becomes President.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  135. We’ll all need to be brave, CS, not matter who becomes President.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  136. Skynet keeps putting the extra keystroke in so “no matter” becomes “not matter.” Effing skynet.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  137. no that’s colossus the forbin project,

    narciso (d1f714)

  138. crimethink takes many forms,

    https://twitter.com/LaloDagach/status/778333686248968192

    narciso (d1f714)

  139. Steve: Maybe someday I’ll make you a bad Zabaglione
    Us: you shut yo mouth
    Steve: But I’m talkin’ ’bout Zab
    Us: Then we can dig it

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  140. I thought they outsourced that job to the low bidder — some company named “Internet Security Investigation Services,” ISIS for short — located in Aleppo, Syria. No?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  141. No, DRJ, I think y’all call it “dark money”… you didn’t get Claire McCaskill’s memo?

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  142. But people who don’t like Trump seem absolutely rabid without being able to explain why specifically.

    iyi got em by the short hirs

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  143. ugh *hairs* i mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  144. “See, if I asked you if you wanted some dinner and you grabbed an egg roll and started to chow down, I’d say to myself, “This zabaglione’s carryin’ on like he ain’t got a care in the world. Who know? Maybe he don’t. Maybe this fool’s such a bad zabaglione, he don’t got to worry about nothin’, he just sit down, eat my Chinese, watch my TV.” See? You ain’t even sat down yet. On that TV there, since you been in the room, is a woman with her breasteses hangin’ out, and you ain’t even bothered to look. You just been clockin’ me. Now, I know I’m pretty, but I ain’t as pretty as a pair a titties.”

    — Drexel Spivey, “True Romance”

    Colonel Haiku (7caebd)

  145. national review has just slightly less gravitas than colin kaepertwat anymore

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  146. It’s not just Trump who is driving interest. This is also the first presidential debate to pit a male candidate against a female candidate as Democrat Hillary Clinton seeks to become the first woman to be elected president.

    lol

    people wanna see if the pig’ll seize up

    i confess to being somewhat curious myself

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  147. The issue is that these emails involve the private email address of someone you’d recognize, and we’re trying to replace it with a placeholder address as to not expose it.

    Scrubbed: Hillary@hogwallow.com
    Replaced by: Colin@fallguy,com

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  148. Cernovich says

    That’s where I stopped reading.

    Patterico (bcf524)

  149. @ Bob23 (#140), who wrote:

    If even half or a quarter of the Clintons’ acts are true — murder, threats, abuse, rape, bribery, misuse of power, fraud, obstruction of justice, theft, extortion,Federal records fraud, endangering state secrets and US assets, etc., etc., etc. then these and a long list I haven’t mentioned, seem to be FAR beyond the gravity and volume of anything Trump has ever done.

    But people who don’t like Trump seem absolutely rabid without being able to explain why specifically.

    What has he done that in any way begins to compare with Hillary and Bill’s crimes?

    I’d like to know. Everything I can come up with is peanuts by comparison.

    This question is civil, pertinent, and well-put. I can answer only for myself. Forgive me if I do it in a roundabout way.

    Look at this photo, if you can. I abhor the two men in this photo — and for purposes of this discussion, Bubba & Hillary are interchangeable, jointly & severally responsible as lifelong co-conspirators and enablers. I abhor them both on a personal, emotional level. But beyond that, I abhor them both on moral, ethical, religious, and most of all, political grounds.

    It’s impossible to say which I abhor more because overall, they both peg my needle. But some of the reasons I despise them apply to both equally; some apply to both, but not equally; and some apply only to one.

    Felonies: For instance, I’ll quickly agree that if we take Bill&Hill’s unindicted, unproven felonies, assume their guilt, and consult the relevant federal sentencing guidelines, their cumulative fines, penalties, and years of imprisonment would likely dwarf anything that can be reasonably postulated as potential criminal liability on Trump’s part.

    In particular, when I consider the gravity of Bubba’s worst felonies — his perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with his impeachment, on charges of which he was manifestly guilty (but on which he was acquitted for solely political reasons in a betrayal of the public and the Constitution) — then it’s pretty hard for me to imagine a kind of criminally felonious conduct that should be more disqualifying of a potential presidential candidate (or his enabling co-conspirator). Trump hasn’t yet had the level of power, the abuse of which could reach cosmic levels. Bill&Hill have had that power, and have abused it. Nothing Trump could have done in scamming wanna-be real estate millionaires through Trump U or skimping on his taxes or bribing a county commissioner could possibly be as consequential.

    So if we’re limiting ourselves to felony offenses, then yeah, advantage Trump. I’ve never argued otherwise.

    But note: This observation does nothing to establish that Trump is himself fit. So, on the basic standard of “avoids violating the criminal law,” do I have confidence that Trump can meet it? Nope. Every day he refuses to release those tax returns, all by itself, would prevent me from ever voting for Donald Trump. He hasn’t been convicted, but then again, neither has she. I don’t believe either of them is clean or “non-criminal” in any meaningful sense, even though I’ll stipulate that on this score, she’s clearly worse.

    Felonies would, therefore, fall into the category of “reasons why I despise both Hillary and Trump” that apply more forcefully to Hillary than to Trump.

    Other stuff: I could run through a similar sort of personal analysis on all kinds of other character, fitness, philosophy, and policy grounds. Some of my objections to Trump apply only to him and not at all to the Clintons, and vice versa. Most apply to them both in some degree, though. And on many things — pro-statist, pro-big government, ignorant or contemptuous of constitutional civil liberties, tax-and-spend, fiscal irresponsibility, egotism, secrecy — they’re functionally indistinguishable from where I sit.

    At the end of the day, though, no matter how you slice it, they’re both overwhelmingly unfit. I won’t vote for a candidate so overwhelmingly unfit, not even on grounds that the other candidate is overwhelmingly unfit.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  150. and we’re talking obstruction of justice, of any prospective investigation, not that there was one this time,

    narciso (d1f714)

  151. #153:

    Six huge boobs.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  152. Beldar,

    The problem with Bill Clinton is more profound. If I had to trace the death of the Rule of Law in America to any one thing, it would be to his blatant perjury and subsequent rampant abuses of power to get away with it — everything from intimidation of witnesses to character assassination to IRS audits of accusers. The day he was acquitted, it said that impeachment was a dead letter in the Constitution except as a means to an end, and that Sam Ervin was wrong.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  153. his cra revisions, set the fuse to the subprime crisis, he deployed us forces to strategically irrelevant location, like somalia and haiti, (the last apparently to further personal business interests), to other locations, like the balkans where al queda was getting off the ground, made the franchise, less relevant with motor voter, slashed defense and intelligence when the former group was starting up,

    narciso (d1f714)

  154. well johnson didn’t want to go into vietnam, he sort of crossed the tripwire through half measures, none of his top advisers really understood what it entailed,

    narciso (d1f714)

  155. @Beldar: I substantially agree with you regarding the respective characters of the candidates. Here is where I civilly disagree with you:

    1) The media, government, and transnational professional classes are in the tank for Hillary, and not for Trump. They will be a check on Trump and enablers of Hillary.

    2) Trump is an outsider. Insiders need to lose hard once in a while to encourage the others.

    3) The krack kadres of kampaign konsultants who led the last two Republican candidates to genteel failure need to be publicly shown to be charlatans. If Trump wins the machine parasites lose.

    4) My vote is an not an beautiful expression of the purity of my soul. It is the wolves and lambs voting on who is dinner. My participation is extorted. I should not have to defend myself from those who would restrict my freedom and take my property, and do so with the fig leaf that may participation in the process gives them, but here we are. Voting for anyone at all is a moral compromise for me.

    Gabriel Hanna (7e037e)

  156. Remember too that the normal primary process was trying to deliver Jeb. Can you imagine what the media would be doing to him now? Trump at least can occasionally get a message through the jamming, and that is only because he is a celebrity.

    Gabriel Hanna (7e037e)

  157. COMPLETELY OFF-TOPIC:

    I happened to look at the California ballot initiatives. There are 16. Three of them are truly great, 1 is incomprehensible, and the other 12 range from bad to communist plot, as usual.

    My take:

    51 Bonds. No
    52 An argument between hospitals and nurses about some fee. ???
    53 Requite voter approval before revenue bonds can be issued. Yes
    54 Require all bills posted 72 hours before vote, all legislative hearings recorded and online. Yes
    55 Extend “temporary” income surtax. This is my shocked face. NO.
    56 $2 more tobacco tax. I quit a while back, but that doesn’t mean I’ve turned Nazi. NO.
    57 Easier parole. No. Ask Pat.
    58 Backslide on English-only schools. NO
    59 Order public officials to overturn Citizens United um, No. And, you dolts!
    60 Make porn stars use condoms. AKA Make porn stars work in Nevada. No.
    61 Drug pricing. Guy who sells $1 billion in drugs to state wants to make EVERYONE ELSE selling drugs have regulated prices. He’s exempt. He wrote it. NO.
    62 Repeal death penalty. NO.
    63 Nasty gun and ammunition limits and annoyances. Hell No.
    64 Marijuana legalization. The regulation is rather less than tobacco or booze. Felons can get licenses. NO. I’d be for this if pot sales were confined to a subset of existing liquor stores and their liquor licenses were on the hook.
    65 Carryout bag charge hijacking for pet cause. NO.
    66 Death penalty appeal limits and restrictions. YES.
    67 Statewide plastic bad ban. Because those red parts of the state won’t do it! NO.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  158. *53 Require

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  159. yikes, abandon all hope ye who enter here,

    narciso (d1f714)

  160. *67 badbag

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  161. Gabriel:

    1) The media, government, and transnational professional classes are in the tank for Hillary, and not for Trump. They will be a check on Trump and enablers of Hillary.

    It’s reasonable to be concerned about checks and enablers, including the ones you named (media, government, by which I assume you mean the administrative sector, and “transnational professional classes” – whatever that is). I agree they are all probably Hillary supporters.

    But haven’t you forgotten Congress, the biggest and most powerful checks/enablers in Washington DC?

    If the GOP retains control of the House and a slim margin in the Senate, who will serve as a check on Trump if he decides to wheel and deal with the Democrats by spending money? Do you honestly think the GOP will oppose him the way they might oppose Hillary?

    The irony to me is that we are forced to contemplate whether two feckless candidates and a feckless Congress will stand up for anything conservative. But that’s where we are. Maybe Trump will be better but this isn’t simply Trump vs Hillary to me. It’s Trump+Congress vs Hillary+Congress to me.

    DRJ (15874d)

  162. But then I believe the GOP will retain control of the House and possibly the Senate. If you think the Democrats will win the House, I understand a desire to see a split government by electing Trump. For some, the goal in this election is to paralyze DC.

    DRJ (15874d)

  163. @DRJ:But haven’t you forgotten Congress, the biggest and most powerful checks/enablers in Washington DC?

    I haven’t laughed that hard in days.

    if he decides to wheel and deal with the Democrats by spending money?

    If. If they get majorities in both houses that might be a threat, but we’ve seen no credible evidence of that. Hillary definitely would get her way on everything, and what she wants is far worse.

    Do you honestly think the GOP will oppose him the way they might oppose Hillary?

    Judging by their performance against Obama, I don’t think they’ll be any good at opposing Hillary.

    It’s Trump+Congress vs Hillary+Congress to me.

    I’m be voting Republican down the whole ticket, don’t worry.

    Gabriel Hanna (7e037e)

  164. I am reminded of the saying, you (blank) with the bull, you get the horns.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=152&v=jj-BO2ME3y4

    Toros

    Toros de Lidia.

    I don’t see them getting away with for too much longer.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  165. In case one fails, we’ll backstop with the other. If both executive and legislative are in Republican hands, don’t worry, the media, bureaucracy, courts and NGOs will fight for all their worth.

    Gabriel Hanna (7e037e)

  166. With two, you get egg roll…

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/2fortuesday.jpg

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  167. unfortunately I think we end up like pachirri, the late legendary matador,

    narciso (d1f714)

  168. Is it fun to be patronizing, Gabriel?

    DRJ (15874d)

  169. @DRJ:Is it fun to be patronizing, Gabriel?

    Emotional cues don’t come well through text. I think you would find it more fun if you didn’t imagine things that weren’t stated. Or intended.

    Gabriel Hanna (7e037e)

  170. Uno, Dos, Tres, Quattro, …

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  171. According to Legal Insurrection, a young female pro-Trump la student discovered all this:

    https://twitter.com/GOPPollAnalyst/status/777691379971612672

    Her user name is Katica.

    Two people from Platte River Networks took the 5th amendment last week. Also Bill Thornton.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  172. Paul Combetta bought a house that day, too? (July 24, 2014)

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  173. Commies all teh way down…

    Obama’s CIA Director Voted for The Communist Party For President
    —Ace

    “Obama’s CIA Director supported the Communist Party during the latter height of the Cold War. (Note: I originally said he voted Communist in 1980. This seems to be an error on my part (and an error of the guy I got it from); he’s saying he got polygraphed in 1980, and was remembering voting Communist in an election prior to that time.)

    Yes, this makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

    CNN plays this like a funny, silly anecdote about one man’s panic at the polygraph, and how he chose to tell the truth.

    At his first polygraph test to enter the CIA, the future director had a secret.
    John Brennan on Thursday recalled being asked a standard question for a top security clearance at his early CIA lie detector test: Have you ever worked with or for a group that was dedicated to overthrowing the US?

    “I froze,” Brennan said during a panel discussion about diversity in the intelligence community at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual conference. “This was back in 1980, and I thought back to a previous election where I voted, and I voted for the Communist Party candidate…

    PS: This sounds to me like Lois Lerner’s planted question to disclose the targeting of conservative groups right before that story was going to break on its own anyway.

    I don’t think Brennan is just offering this tidbit by happenstance. I think he got press inquires about it. So now he tells this funny, human, uplifting tale about that silly time he voted for a party sworn to overthrow the American government and impose a dictatorship.”

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/365935.php

    Colonel Haiku (a74c52)

  174. Ban Him For Patronizing!!!

    Colonel Haiku (a74c52)

  175. Heads may explode…

    Cruz’s Campaign Manager: Cruz May Endorse Trump If He Keeps to His New Disciplined Approach
    —Ace

    “For some reason, people are speculating that this is Cruz’s own campaign manager trying to publicly shame him into making an endorsement, which seems like a very quick way to get fired to me.

    But whatever, Cruz campaign manager Jeff Roe seems to be putting up trial balloons, whether their his own or his boss’. (For some reason, I suspect the latter.)”

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/365937.php

    Colonel Haiku (a74c52)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6084 secs.