Crime and Punishment

When I was practicing law, I often heard people complain about judges and prosecutors when those officials reached conclusions with which they disagreed. In most instances, the complaints were based on a lack of understanding of the facts of the case, the legal rules involved, or both. That was particularly true of criminal accusations.

Let’s say you are texting and driving. You know better; Public Service Announcements tell you how dangerous it is. Your mother tells you how dangerous it is. But your state has no law against it, and you think you’re in control. While you are texting, you crash into another car, injuring a passenger and totaling the vehicle.

Or let’s say you made the potato salad for the family’s picnic. It’s a really hot day and the sun is beating down. You know that foods with mayonnaise shouldn’t be left in the heat, but you are tending to other things. When everyone finally sits down to eat, several people get violently ill and it’s traced to the spoiled mayo.

Or let’s take a far more serious situation: you are one of those “good guys” with a gun. You bought it legally and have a permit to carry it. You have it in a holster, and for some reason, when you sit down, it discharges, killing a bystander.

In each of these scenarios, you have been responsible for harm. In none of them have you committed a crime, because criminal acts require something the law calls mens rea–criminal intent. In order for the state to charge you with a crime, it must have evidence that you intentionally committed a criminal act. Negligence and stupidity are not crimes.

That is not to say that your actions cannot be punished. In each of my examples, the persons harmed can bring civil actions against the negligent person who caused the harm, and can recover damages. In addition, your actions can be reported by the media, censured by your neighbors and provide reason for your boss and others to lose confidence in your judgment.

The FBI investigated Hillary Clinton’s use of her own email server, and found no evidence of intentional wrongdoing sufficient to charge her with a crime. The investigation found (and severely criticized) carelessness–both in Clinton’s handling of her emails and in what the agency characterized as the “culture” of the State Department. The conclusion was not that she hadn’t done anything wrong; the conclusion was that the wrong was not criminal in nature. (Click here for a more extensive explanation of the legal standards and relevant statutes.)

Individual voters can–and will–decide for themselves whether they think this particular breach of judgment makes Clinton unfit to be President. If she weren’t running against a certifiable psychopath, it might well cost her the election; but even if it doesn’t, even if she wins handily, it will cost her significant political capital (indeed, it already has) and will give additional ammunition to those who despise her.

Although it does not excuse her breach, the investigation’s discovery that many other State Department officials (including but not limited to Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice) have used and continue to use personal servers because of the ponderous nature of the “official” system should lead to a formal review of the agency’s technology systems, and to an effort to improve the State Department’s evidently unwieldy system.

Rather than Congressional action that might reduce incentives to bypass the rules, however, we have Paul Ryan’s announcement that the GOP will now “investigate” the FBI for reaching a conclusion partisans dislike.

The FBI investigation was conducted by a Republican appointed by George W. Bush, a man with a reputation for independence and unimpeachable ethics. Ryan’s willingness to besmirch that reputation and impugn the credibility of the FBI in order to make political points is something we might expect from Donald Trump, but is exceedingly disappointing (albeit not surprising) coming from the Speaker of the House.

At some point, it would be nice if our political actors focused upon making government work better, and left toxic gamesmanship behind. But I’m not holding my breath.

 

 

43 thoughts on “Crime and Punishment

  1. I have a great deal of difficulty accepting that Clinton had no criminal intent. She’s too smart not to have known. Then to have lied about it publicly…I don’t buy it.

  2. I agree with Neal Smith. She is not an “extremely careless” person. She is intelligent and calculating.

    I don’t handle information nearly as sensitive as what she did, but I can tell you unequivocally, if I set up my own private server and used it for work email, I’d be fired and prosecuted for information theft. Why does she get off scot-free?

  3. Systemic problems.
    “We have met the enemy and he is us.”
    Remember the Pogo quote?

  4. I have several acquaintances in government at the state & local levels, and the carelessness endemic throughout these organizations is almost comical. I suspect that it’s mostly due to elected officials essentially being unfireable, along with an institutional culture of just getting by, that allows this to continue. More than once I’ve told them that they’d last about 30 minutes in the private sector – which may explain why they’re so intent on keeping their current positions.

  5. Paul Ryan is a disgrace himself. Remember his lies while he was running for VP with Romney? He has proven many times that he will do whatever it takes to maintain or attain power for the republican party.

    He has been one of the main players in the game of a do-nothing congress and he answers only to the wealthy elite in this country who are doing everything they can to destroy our government.

  6. Missing from Comey’s chastising was the actual number of emails that were marked “Classified.” But we now know the answer to that question. The answer is “two.” Yup, just two. But wait, it get better. Both of them were MIS-MARKED as classified. They were call lists, lists of people the SecState was going to call. Once the calls are made, and they were, they are no longer classified.

    So here we have it – millions of dollars were spent in this spin-off of the Benghazi nothing-burger to discover that Hillary Clinton, like the other two Secretaries of State during the email era, used a private email account (and before you scream “but she used her own server!,” do you really think that was less secure than Colin Powell’s AOL account? Really?), and sent exactly ZERO emails correctly marked as “Classified.”

    You may now go back to your regularly scheduled false equivalence between an email tempest-in-a-teapot and the man running as a fascist.

  7. My two favorite new phrases: “false equivalencies” and “confirmation bias”. Seems like I could use both in a sentence describing this tempest in a teapot.

  8. Sheila: I think you hit a point that has not gotten much play in the press. The practice of using personal servers was evidently a standard practice by Clinton’s predecessors and she continued the practice. It certainly was not a good and safe practice from a national security perspective, but others like Powell and Rice who were highly respected did it too. It may not be an ideal legal defense to say that others were doing it too, but prosecutors know that it can be very difficult to prosecute someone for an unenforced law. My guess is that the pattern and practice of using personal servers by prior Secretaries of State was a key reason why there was no prosecution.

  9. Silly me; I keep wondering why the government continues to allow officials, elected and appointed, to use single servers? Probably also a silly conclusion on my part but (and I am NOT a Hillary supporter) I don’t believe Hillary is the only government official using a single server who has made careless mistakes. With thousands of E-mails to deal with; the law of averages would rule out Hillary being the only “careless user” and others never making careless mistakes. She is simply the only one the Republicans have wasted millions of tax dollars to repeatedly investigate. Same with blaming her for Benghazi – and please remember I am NOT a Hillary supporter. Common sense and logic are lost on Republicans along with being “politically correct”.

    This post brought to mind a criminal case when I worked in the Municipal Court Probation Department years ago. An old man, alcoholic with emphysema, had been convicted of shooting up his neighbor’s home. He was also hearing impaired and his loud voice carried when he told the probation officer he shouldn’t have been arrested for that; he was aiming at his other neighbors – the neighbors, not their house – and he accidentally shot up the wrong neighbor’s house. What are the views of you blog readers on this case. He also told the probation officer he didn’t use the prescribed treatment for his emphysema, he deliberately drank till he passed out knowing that unconscious people involuntarily breathe.

    Two more police killings of black men in the news. One was reported as having a gun (news reports haven’t stated if he did or not); video shows two officers holding him on the floor and one of them shooting him. The other case was filmed by the driver’s girlfriend who claimed he reached for his drivers license as ordered by the officer and was shot to death. He was licensed to carry a gun and did have his weapon with him but…did the officer see the gun or know who the driver was when he stopped him…and why was he stopped? Police should be held to the same laws as those they are paid to enforce. Placing an officer on “administrative leave” means they are not on duty but are still being paid – this is a sticky situation. “Innocent until proven guilty.” But compare it with an arrestee who is held in jail till trial; they, too, are supposed to be “innocent until proven guilty.” In most cases (as with my attacker), keeping him in jail protected possible victims…but what do we know about the officers who shoot to kill in questionable situations. I learned as a victim that, while prisoners have the right to a speedy trial, victims do not have that right and have no say in what charges are filled against their attackers. Not only shooting victims but remember the drunken officer here who killed one man and permanently injured two other people while breaking several laws and police procedures. It took a second drunken driving wreck in another county during his three years of freedom awaiting trial to be jailed. How much of this was political here in Marion County?

    We have no questions regarding the political nature of Hillary Clinton and the single server mystery of did she or didn’t she, how many E-mails are in question and most important – WHAT DAMAGE WAS DONE – WAS ANY DAMAGE DONE BY HER ACTIONS?

  10. I’m just going to say that as a former email administrator for North America in an international company prior to moving to Europe, this case caught my interest. Of course, it was done prior to her service but that doesn’t mean it was right! If the CEO of the company I worked for used a private email server in their home, I would have had to set it up and frankly, would have declined because it’s wrong and just not secure, even if it cost me my job. I’m afraid, she got off scot free for this breach of security and what she did was intentional and wrong. Thankfully, I don’t work for the FBI so I have no say so in this regard but it will not change my mind. She did it to protect herself (I realize she may have battle scars from the 90s) but this is the US gov’t, not some international company protecting secrets and she lied about it. This action really messes with my support for her and makes me wish that others knew the severity of this issue. Considering the choices for President (now), there’s no way that I’ll vote for an idiot like Trump but I will vote for her with my nose held and a vomit bucket nearby.

  11. Neal, the issue of criminal intent can perhaps be explained this way. The secrecy laws are designed and intended to prevent the disclosure of classified information to people who shouldn’t have it (your friendly Russian agent, for example). What the FBI concluded was that there was no intent to disclose the information in the emails to someone lacking the security clearance. The criminal intent necessary to be guilty of a crime is to give the information to someone without the security clearance. (That’s the difference between HRC’s issue and David Petraeus–he gave classified information to his biographer who *didn’t* have security clearance.)

    Also, it seems pretty clear that there’s no criminal law prohibiting the use of a private email server. If there was, it wouldn’t take much of an investigation.

    There are plenty of things we don’t like that aren’t criminal offenses. Even some horrible things are not criminal offenses. But wishing that someone would go to jail for something that’s not a criminal offense, well…there are plenty of dictators who have done such things. I would hope that we wouldn’t go down that same path, no matter how much we may dislike someone.

  12. JoAnn: “He also told the probation officer he didn’t use the prescribed treatment for his emphysema, he deliberately drank till he passed out knowing that unconscious people involuntarily breathe.”

    That made me laugh out loud.

    And then the other paragraphs brought me back to reality. #BlackLivesMatter

  13. Having spent over 20 years as one of those lazy, incompetent government workers we all talk about I have some knowledge of government IT systems that Sheila mentioned. I used to get 300 e-mails a day, most of which required a reply. That was, of course, on top of my other duties and called for many 16 hour days.

    The IT system we had was a nightmare. They would block access if certain words were found in the text of e-mails. They blocked access to many web sites. I especially enjoyed having to put together a presentation for staff on an Executive Order only to find that the subject matter was considered taboo by the IT gods. I ended up creating all of the slides at home and putting them on a thumb drive. I’m just glad that was before the agency limited thumb drives. I wouldn’t have been allowed to present that information, because my thumb drive wouldn’t have worked on the system. Does that sound a bit surreal to any of you?

    Congress is essentially responsible for the level of incompetence in government IT systems. When the systems were relatively new, the agency had test systems that could be used to develop better ways of dealing with the massive amounts of data we had. People with the talent to do so could log onto the test system and develop new programs. After Congress finished with us, nobody but IT staff could do anything in the test system. The problem there is that the IT staff had no clue about the activities of the agency. IT began contracting out almost every new development, delaying implementation by years.

    We know it is possible to create elegant IT systems. It is not possible to create a system nobody can hack.

  14. Bill Wilson, thank you for explaining mens rea, to neal smith. I worry about some of the technical misinformation that is repeated unchallenged in the comments on this blog simply because it is spewed as political free speech. The use of private servers among administration officials of both parties has been clearly documented, and will continue. Government servers are often and easily hacked by people who actually do have criminal intent. Elected officials have the right to use personal email accounts, and are not in violation of any laws when they look at unclassified work email via personal account access. It is when they are careless about what they view that problems may arise. Sheila is right on target, as usual, when she notes that there is a need for formal review of the government’s approach to technology. Among the technorati, the government’s grasp of computing is a laughing matter.

  15. All I can say is the US citizens are the only ones who haven’t seen Ms Clinton’s e-mails. And when the nervous employees at State queried her staff about the private server they were told to not bring it up again suggest to me that the gross negligence test was met. When your employees, who are lifers, are nervous about your conduct, it can be assumed they know what they are talking about and overriding it with the command to not speak of it is what I call a smoking gun. I would say she got a lot more ‘benefit of the doubt’ in this standard than the rest of us did–including jailed whistle blowers. I just hope one of these countries hackers who has the e-mails (we apparently are the only ones not privy to them) releases them. I also find it beyond credulity that a Secretary of State did not realize that her e-mails, as she created them, were classified. And if all the things you can accuse Clinton of, stupidity is not one of them–until now–and it seems to be her go-to defense in this matter.

  16. According to an article I read on AlterNet.org this morning, the DOJ’s Rules Manual for US Attorneys states prosecutors are not to make press statments regarding unindicted persons. Perhaps Comey is not considered a “prosecutor”, but the FBI is a division of the DOJ, and I would think Comey should have to follow the rule book. DOJ employees are also forbidden from participating in partisan politics. Comey’s comments certainly broke that rule. Additionally, DOJ employees are required to have all press statements vetted. Comey went out of his way to declare that no one within DOJ knew the contents of his remarks. As you point out, Sheila, Comey is a Republican, appointed to his post by George W. Bush. In his comments on Clinton’s non-indictment, Comey chose to insert himself into the Presidential race. He should, in my opinion, be removed fromm office.

  17. Thank you, Peggy. I have some knowledge of what government staff go through in dealing with IT matters, and I have long suspected that struggle (plus the regrettable arrogance of people in power, sadly) to have more than a little to do with why not only Sec. Clinton but her predecessors had private email servers. I am comfortable with the lack of criminal charges. I wish we could create a bureaucracy with an IT system that its staff could actually work within effectively. But bureaucracies aren’t like that, especially when they take instructions from our Congress. So we live, instead, in a world where not only is important work hobbled by bureaucratic and political nonsense but millions of dollars and thousands of hours of worthwhile people’s time are wasted on ridiculous political witch hunts, too. I am unable to call this progress.

  18. You would not believe the material that isa called, “Classified!” If the CIA Director has flatus issues that might be included. If the FBI breaks into the home of an old lady, puts her to the floor and handcuffs here, that might be classified. I have my doubts that Clinton wrote out her plans to invade Texas on her personal server. Only Texas politicians know that.

  19. Politifact states that Colin Powell had a personal email account but not a server. It rated H. Clinton’s claim that she was following precedent as, “Mostly False”.

  20. There is so much misinformation here. Hardly surprising,this is a partisan blog. Are we a country of laws or not? There’s been a lot of talk about fascism on this very forum, yet Hillary is to be congratulated for skirting the law. Funny,she has a history of doing just that. The cult of personality is strong in the US and on this very forum. Of course,Hillary is the candidate gasconading her experience as being the deciding factor every voter should be considering. Nevermind she has said her vote for the Iraqi occupation was a mistake. A mistake,just like if you had forgotten to purchase something on your grocery list. The torpidity among the Democrat establishment and its sycophants is a sight to behold. The disease has spread from the Repubs to the Democrats as well. We are doomed.

    Leona Helmsley became infamous for boastfully declaring,”Laws Are For The Little People.” So true.

    Perhaps it would be appropriate if the Clinton campaign changed its catchphrase from “I’m With Her” to I’m With Stupid.

    Whodathunk extreme carelessness would be looked upon as a virtue? Whodathunk Ronald and Nancy Reagan would be given credit for bringing the AIDS epidemic to the forefront of the nation’s consciousness.

  21. Oh,since the topic is crime and punishment,perhaps everyone reading this blog should acquaint themselves with John Kiriakou and his experience. Much different from the treatment given to oligarch Hillary R Clinton.

    Fascism is already and you’re cheering it on.

  22. This report from Glen Ford of The Black Agenda Report is enlightening.

    An excerpt:

    FBI Director James Comey essentially admitted as much when he acknowledged that there was “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information.” A reasonable person in Clinton’s position “should have known” that what she was doing was violating the law. But, he said, the FBI’s “judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” The public knows perfectly well that what Comey really means is that there’s no way he was going to keep the rulers of the United States from getting the president they want.

    So, Hillary gets off, as did the warlord General David Petraeus and other insiders who were not fully prosecuted for clearly breaking the law. Yet, President Obama has shattered all historical records in treating whistleblowers as spies. Obama pushed for and got the power to detain people indefinitely without trial or charge, but is so tolerant of systemic criminality among Wall Street bankers that his own attorney general had to briefly admit that the Lords of Capital are “too big to jail.” So, on the one hand, the fundamental right to due process under the law has ceased to exist – yet, for the rich impunity has become all but absolute.

    More here—> http://blackagendareport.com/clinton_crisis_of_legitimacy

    Btw, My own opinion is this is going to backfire upon the Democrats well beyond this election cycle.

  23. We are a nation of laws and even though the initiation of this tempest in a teapot was purely political, and it will end according to Paul Ryan purely politically, and nobody can identify any harm that came from it, the law was satisfied.

    There is no difference between denial among her political enemies for this and for climate change. In both cases the best expertise that humanity has was appropriately applied to, well, an impending catastrophe in the case of climate change and a political issue in the email case, and in humanity’s best judgement a verdict rendered.

    Hillary’s enemies just don’t like the real world. They believe that they are entitled to their reality. That’s why conservative politics has almost always failed in practice, it is simply out of touch with reality. It’s fantasy.

    The name usually associated with fantasy is entertainment. That is the birthplace of and fuel for conservatism. That where it stems from and leads to.

    Donald Trump is the perfect conservative candidate because he’s also an illusion created in and by the entertainment world. He’s Disney on parade.

    George Bush was the perfect conservative President. What he sold us was a fantasy involving enriching the wealthy and conquering the poor and the results were exactly what one would expect from entertainment. Dramatic.

    That’s our choice in Nov. The real world vs the entertainment world. Life vs soap opera.

    Seems an easy choice for me.

  24. Ahh, I have known people like the Clinton’s over the years. They always have an excuse for skirting the rules (no pun intended), when caught they accuse others of picking on them. Someone is always against them. Sorry that excuse that everyone else did sounds like a teenagers excuse.

    Here is the deal if Hillary knew the State Department had a flawed system, then job one for Hillary would have been to tell the President and resolve it ASAP. Given the vast resources of the Federal Government Pentagon, FBI, CIA, NSA concerning electronic communications, no one should say the expertise is not in house. Let’s not forget the House and Senate had a Democratic Majority in 2009. The job would have been done if there was, what’s the word, Leadership.

    The Monday before the last Super Tuesday the AP announces Hillary has won the nominating process. Right now 2,383 delegates are needed for nomination. Hillary Clinton has 2,220 Pledged Delegates, Bernie Sanders has 1,831. The AP added in the Super Delegates. The eventual margin was 363,579 votes, or 7.1 percentage points, closer than the 2008 primary between Clinton and Barack Obama in California.

    Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton “just happen” to run into each other at the Phoenix Airport and have a secret meeting. The very next Saturday Hillary is interviewed by the FBI, and then Comey announces no charges. The President and Hillary appear together at a rally in NC, just hours after Comey’s teleconference. I suspect the President did not just put together this campaign trip for Hillary together at the last minute with knowing what the result would be.

    The President said the following in NC – “There has never been any man or woman more qualified for this office than Hillary Clinton—ever. And that’s the truth. That’s the truth.”

    So OK, Hillary is more qualified than Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Truman, IKE, JFK or LBJ???? What a crock.

  25. In law school in constitutional and criminal law classes we were repeatedly lectured on the necessity for a mens re in defining a crime. There have been stories in the internet about how she “got off” because of who she is etc. No, not true. She didn’t get off because there was no mens re and therefore nothing to “get off” from, and if she could somehow be found guilty of a crime in the absence of a mens re, then her predecessors who did the same thing should be indicted and brought to the dock. This was a tempest in a teapot from the beginning. If you want to hate Hillary, be my guest, but find other grounds for such expression other than the one Fox News fabricated.

  26. One of the consequences of our collective overdosing on entertainment is that the narratives employed pull us in. That’s why entertainment is entertaining. It creates the illusion of our heroism in some cases.

    Fine if you leave the media room secure in what is not what you wish were true.

    But Fox News, as an example, pretends to be real life. Watchers can actually become heroic experts in every field saving the world from the dark forces of reality.

    Now as an example I know next to nothing about law and medicine. I have other interests and I can buy that expertise if I need it. (Affording it is another matter.)

    Fox News entices its viewers with instant expertise. Watch us and know more.

    Alas my news sources just tell me what happened and I have to figure out the context myself. And sometimes I struggle to.

    Then instead of Fox News I come here to this lawyer bar and chat with those who know the context of law in detail.

    A little time consuming but ultimately very rewarding.

  27. The FBI Director found no evidence that any of Hillary’s communications nor her server were hacked. However, the State Department’s technology has been breached a number of times. Neither Hillary nor the FBI has promoted that weakness in our State Dept. – understandably – but I’ve yet to see Congress get upset enough to focus on correcting that weakness. Of course, technology is not running for President and is not a woman named Clinton.

  28. Here’s an interesting article wrt to the e-mail imbroglio.

    But then there is an instance where the State Department cable traffic rises and there are few if any Clinton corresponding emails. It’s the case of Rosatom, the Russian State Nuclear Agency: Clinton and senior officials at the State Department received dozens of cables on the subject of Rosatom’s activities around the world, including a hair-raising cable about Russian efforts to dominate the uranium market. As secretary of state, Clinton was a central player in a variety of diplomatic initiatives involving Rosatom officials. But strangely, there is only one email that mentions Rosatom in Clinton’s entire collection, an innocuous email about Rosatom’s activities in Ecuador. To put that into perspective, there are more mentions of LeBron James, yoga and NBC’s Saturday Night Live than the Russian Nuclear Agency in Clinton’s emails deemed “official.”

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-missing-emails-secretary-state-department-personal-server-investigation-fbi-214016

    It seems Clinton is more concerned with entertainment than reality.

  29. For those of you who have been lucky enough to log on to the government website to watch today’s committee meeting on redistricting, I hope you will be able to leave some comments about the mtg on this blog.

    I have tried to open the site since 12:45 and keep getting the error message that traffic is heavy and they are working on it. It sounds like some computer system upgrading at the state house is in order and/or they need to hire people who are able to repair an issue like this in a short amount of time. I called the state house to inquire the status – it sounds like they may contract out this type of work. Anyway, it is not being fixed in a reasonable time frame and I am very frustrated about missing out on watching this very important meeting.

  30. WilliamI like all self defined experts is hard in search of something that could be mistaken for a fact to empower his Fox News fantasy. Certainly there must be something that prevents Roger Ailes and Donald Trump and Paul Ryan and he from being wrong!

    After all they agree so they must be all right.

  31. William1 excellent comments. I think maybe I figured the Hillary phenomena out. We were endlessly reminded of Hillary’s brilliance by the McMega Media her positions were nuanced, and she had all that experience. All we had to do was wait a few months and the Queen would be crowned. However, do not look too carefully at her, it would be like staring into sun there was so much brilliance.

    Somehow we are expected to believe that only the Koch Bros money have political influence. All the money the Clinton’s collected on the speaking tours were just chump change and no influence was sought or received. George Soros gives $7M to Hillary’s but we are expected to believe it has no political influence.

    The Democrats had the chance to pick a virtually pristine candidate in Bernie Sanders compared to Hillary. Instead now the brilliant Hillary and Democratic establishment will have to spin more stories.

  32. Louie you seem to imply that for Bernie to be a good candidate Hillary just has to be a bad candidate.

    Why can’t it be that both are good?

  33. Louie you seem to imply that for Bernie to be a good candidate Hillary just has to be a bad candidate.

    Why can’t it be that both are good?

  34. Louie,good points.

    The Democrat Party establishment in their attempts to derail Sander’s efforts and ideals has shown their true colors. For decades,Democrats supposedly supported many of his ideals–it turns out those supposed ideals was just simple sloganeering. Nothing more than empty rhetoric,platitudes and canards used to garner support. Democrats use minorities for window-dressing. Ever wonder why the liberal establishment never mentions the black working class? We must not talk about class in America! That is verboten! It’s…..Gauche!

    Moreover, Clinton doesn’t want the vote from Sander’s supporters. She would rather undress and crawl into bed with Republicans for their support. That in and of itself is telling. She is the candidate of big money and Wall St.She was a do nothing Senator. What exactly what bills did she introduce to counter climate change,unequal pay for women,inequality, et al? Nothing. I guess she did tell the bankers to “cut it out” when they were engaged in their chicanery just prior to the crash. That worked out well. “Cut it out”,sounds like something Palin would say/use in her own defense.

    The Democratic party has spit on 50% of its constituency for giving Clinton its unabated support. Quite a number of so called “Left” pundits have totally lost their credibility. This election cycle has been enlightening. I’m sure there’s more to come.

    Wait until November,the Democrats will squawk endlessly at the results as if they just don’t understand what happened. The party acquiesced to the Vichy Dems. The Democrat Party is a farce. And a very deeply divided one at that!

    Btw,can anyone post the endless good-deeds the Clinton Foundation has successfully endeavored? I would think the foundation would be at least making an effort at combating systemic racism within the Ferguson Mo. governing body.

  35. Come to think of it,the apologists for Clinton sound and read just like those defending Irsay when he was caught with large amounts of prescription drugs and cash. Of course,if it were a mere mortal,the cash and drugs would’ve been seized by authorities indefinitely and without conviction.

    In America,it pays to be a big time grifter (Clinton) and one of the state’s largest welfare queens (Irsay).

  36. Wulliam1, after carefully searching your posts what I found are “empty rhetoric,platitudes and canards”.

    Exclusively.

  37. It boils down to she could be vs he is ______.

    I suppose that some will bet on the come so if there is ever evidence of wrong doing on her part they will be ahead of the game.

    I think that if she were running for IT security chief I’d be concerned if she was running against someone qualified. That’s another job though he couldn’t do.

    What I’m wrestling with is a job he is qualified to do.

    Dancing with the Stars?

  38. The establishment Democratic Party has employed duck and cover since the Clinton’s have been in power. I read this quote on the internet it sums up my opinion. “It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham.”

    During Obama’s eight years in office, the Democrats have lost more House, Senate, state legislative and governors seats than under any other president.

    When Obama took office, there were 60 Democratic senators; now there are 46. The number of House seats held by Democrats has shrunk from 257 to 188.

    There are now nine fewer Democratic governors than in 2009. Democrats currently hold fewer elected offices nationwide than at any time since the 1920s.

    You might think at some point you might want to change the team, but no we have Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz hanging on. Yeah let’s stick with what loses.
    The Super Delegates number 717 and they make up the Party Establishment, which includes 433 from the DNC, led by the not so neutral Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

  39. Louie,yep. The party automatons are refusing to look at the party objectively. The Democrats are going to lose more seats. They’ll conveniently blame Sanders supporters. Hell,they’ll probably start describing Sander’s supporters as inbred rednecks. That seems to be the answer to the party’s woes. It’s….It’s…..Those darned Republicans! AND their PU trucks!

    When Democrats have a majority and the WH…..They act as if they cannot govern correctly and effectively. We can’t have single payer because of……Republicans!

    The truth is,the New Democrats never wanted single payer in the first place. Why? Because the Democrats are indebted to their Insurance Industry donors.

  40. When you have really inept candidates to sell to the public, the problem facing Rupert Murdoch and Roges Ailes for years, rule #1 is to never talk about your candidate, only the opposition.

    One identifying mark of those who fall for that is that they adopt the same script.

    I guess you’d have to conclude from that that it’s effective. People don’t get very excited about good news. We do however look for the wrecks, the floods and fires, the bloody murders, so if entertainers so shape their scripts people get addicted.

    Of course it’s destructive to Democracy and we’ve witnessed the trajectory of our national civic train wreck.

    All of that though is external to the business of entertainment.

  41. Are you a certified psychotherapist, too, when you say that Donald Trump is a certifiable psychopath?
    I have not read anywhere else that others used private servers for their business communication. I thought they may have had different devices or email addresses. Do you have information that Rice and Powell had and used private servers in their homes or offices?

Comments are closed.