Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, perhaps we are not that far apart. I'll cut to the chase even quicker/what I've always believed.....I think both sides are self-serving/corrupt/bought off/don't serve the people types. I trust none of them and I base this strictly on their actions. And this latest clinton email thing is just another example of the two tier justice we have that is obvious to me that we have in this nation. The stench of it is beyond ugly.
I must admit that your previous posts made me see that (I) myself protect my political party. I can say bad things about Obama based on facts (but there's no emotion behind it.) But if I'm talking about a republican the bad things flow with emotion.
But I must say based on facts I believe you to be at least partly wrong. Yes the democrats are money controlled puppets in a land of big money donations, just like the republicans. But in Washington its all about the money.
The republicans get 100% of their money from large corporations and greedy CEO's like the Koch brothers who want nothing but CEO and corporate tax cuts.
But the democrats get huge sums of money from labor unions (teachers, plumbers, food service workers, ex.ex.) and these are regular middle class Americans. And democrats get money from billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, billionaires who desire to help the poor and keep America's deficits/debt growth low.
But I agree with your overall outlook. Still the money says democrats are a little bit better simply because regular Americans and honorable billionaires give them some money.
But our political system where you need $1 billion dollars to run for president needs to be abolished (but until then I will support democrats with everything I got) because the money says they are a little bit better.
I must admit that your previous posts made me see that (I) myself protect my political party. I can say bad things about Obama based on facts (but there's no emotion behind it.) But if I'm talking about a republican the bad things flow with emotion.
But I must say based on facts I believe you to be wrong. Yes the democrats are money controlled puppets in a land of big money donations, just like the republicans. But in Washington its all about the money.
The republicans get 100% of their money from large corporations and greedy CEO's like the Koch brothers who want nothing but CEO and corporate tax cuts.
But the democrats get huge sums of money from labor unions (teachers, plumbers, food service workers, ex.ex.) and these are regular middle class Americans. And democrats get money from billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, billionaires who desire to help the poor and keep America's deficits/debt growth low.
But I agree with your overall outlook (still the money says democrats are a little bit better simply because regular Americans and honorable billionaires give them some money.)
But our political system where you need $1 billion dollars to run for president needs to be abolished (but until then I will support democrats with everything I got) because the money says they are a little bit better.
Chad.
ummmmm...no.
Scroll down to the chart about mid way down the page:
But despite all the drama and talk of standing up to the pharmaceutical industry, these companies continue to be big spenders, donating $951,018 to presidential candidates in the 2016 presidential election, according to the Center for Responsive Politics and the Federal Election Commission.
Clinton/team dem is outpacing the rep's big time in many industries. Look at big pharma(!). And hedge funds and private equity, commercial banks, lawyers/law groups, securities and investment, etc. She's raking in some big time donations that leave the rep's in the dust.
These are not for "regular middle class americans". Far from it. I think you're being pulled into false rhetoric if you think these people are looking out for the middle class.
And this shift went way back to the 2008 elections:
It's a sleaze fest on both sides in my view chad3. I don't think you can play the "this team is for the little guy, that team is only for the rich/big business". Follow the money and how can one have any other conclusion? What makes it worse to me is the dems sell themselves as the party for the "poor/middle class". Ha! Seriously?!? Follow the money. I see hypocrites, big time.
May I suggest you explore that opensecrets website in detail to see the reality of it all, where the money flows. It's sobering. And please, don't believe the rhetoric nonsense of "we are for the little people, the poor". Follow the money. That's who they are for and serve. Welcome to the self-serving sleazefest. Hypocrite fest. How these clowns look at themselves in the mirror everyday/not laugh when they sell they are for the poor/middle class I'll never know.
When Bill Clinton directly lied to the American people, I didn't really hold that against him. That doesn't mean I believed he shouldn't have been held accountable for committing perjury, but when he lied outside of the deposition, it was more of a "personal" issue for a public person.
What I can't understand is how so many Democrats will continue to support her when she directly lied to the country about matters of national security.
If you are still supporting her after this, how can you justify it?
This isn't a "I don't like her so I will assume she lied", it's a matter of fact. FBI Director Comey completely contradicts many of her direct statements. So, either she is lying or the FBI is lying, and we know it's not the FBI.
If you don't like Trump, don't vote for him. I can't stand Hilary, but I'm not going to vote for Trump.
Why can't Democrats take a stand on this? If enough Democrats had the backbone to do the right thing, there would still be time to select another person at the convention.
Do the majority of Democrats have no integrity at all?
I'm going to cut to the chase and not read this whole thread.
I'm part of the minority who actually trusts Hillary and doesn't see her as "a big liar."
I think her memory fails her sometimes, but that happens to lots of us over a certain age. I don't feel that she lies about the big things. I also feel that she fiercely protects what little privacy she has and I don't feel that she is obligated to tell us every little detail about her personal life.
Judicial Watch Judicial Watch | Because No One Is Above The Law! appears to be a group that spends all of its' time and money investigating the Clintons. They would subpoena her used toilet paper if they could. I actually believe that they abuse the court system with their never-ending lawsuits. (If you go to this page on their website, https://www.judicialwatch.org/investigative-bulletin/, you'll discover that they are still investigating Whitewater which happened 30+ years ago.) I believe Judicial Watch is a good part of the reason Hillary gets very little privacy. Ask yourself if you would want this group investigating everything you do for the next 30+ years. Chances are, you're like me, and the answer is "no."
So, in summary, I like Hillary and I trust her. I believe there are at least 30% of voters who find her trustworthy, so I'm not alone.
I'm going to cut to the chase and not read this whole thread.
I'm part of the minority who actually trusts Hillary and doesn't see her as "a big liar."
I think her memory fails her sometimes, but that happens to lots of us over a certain age. I don't feel that she lies about the big things. I also feel that she fiercely protects what little privacy she has and I don't feel that she is obligated to tell us every little detail about her personal life.
Judicial Watch Judicial Watch | Because No One Is Above The Law! appears to be a group that spends all of its' time and money investigating the Clintons. They would subpoena her used toilet paper if they could. I actually believe that they abuse the court system with their never-ending lawsuits. (If you go to this page on their website, https://www.judicialwatch.org/investigative-bulletin/, you'll discover that they are still investigating Whitewater which happened 30+ years ago.) I believe Judicial Watch is a good part of the reason Hillary gets very little privacy. Ask yourself if you would want this group investigating everything you do for the next 30+ years. Chances are, you're like me, and the answer is "no."
So, in summary, I like Hillary and I trust her. I believe there are at least 30% of voters who find her trustworthy, so I'm not alone.
I just threw up a little in my mouth.
Can you view the following and tell me how....how......HOW in the world you can come to such a conclusion?
This is not R vs D, lib vs conv....it's simple compare and contrasting statements and what I think any rational person would call outright lying that anyone can clearly see. And the first 2 videos are statements made by someone under an fbi criminal investigation. And you even go to the point of saying you trust this person? These statements made by the fbi director against clinton.....this is someone you trust? Someone who sounds like they are ready to run our country in the most highest position?
When Bill Clinton directly lied to the American people, I didn't really hold that against him. That doesn't mean I believed he shouldn't have been held accountable for committing perjury, but when he lied outside of the deposition, it was more of a "personal" issue for a public person.
What I can't understand is how so many Democrats will continue to support her when she directly lied to the country about matters of national security.
If you are still supporting her after this, how can you justify it?
This isn't a "I don't like her so I will assume she lied", it's a matter of fact. FBI Director Comey completely contradicts many of her direct statements. So, either she is lying or the FBI is lying, and we know it's not the FBI.
If you don't like Trump, don't vote for him. I can't stand Hilary, but I'm not going to vote for Trump.
Why can't Democrats take a stand on this? If enough Democrats had the backbone to do the right thing, there would still be time to select another person at the convention.
Do the majority of Democrats have no integrity at all?
Sure, probably she lies about something. Which politician doesn't?
If you think Trump by way of comparison is an honest person, then your integrity might be in question.
Frankly, it's mostly about whose dishonesty is likely less damaging for the nation.
Clinton/team dem is outpacing the rep's big time in many industries. Look at big pharma(!). And hedge funds and private equity, commercial banks, lawyers/law groups, securities and investment, etc. She's raking in some big time donations that leave the rep's in the dust.
These are not for "regular middle class americans". Far from it. I think you're being pulled into false rhetoric if you think these people are looking out for the middle class.
And this shift went way back to the 2008 elections:
It's a sleaze fest on both sides in my view chad3. I don't think you can play the "this team is for the little guy, that team is only for the rich/big business". Follow the money and how can one have any other conclusion?
May I suggest your explore that opensecrets website in detail to see the reality of it all.
And please, don't believe the rhetoric nonsense of "we are for the little people, the poor". Follow the money. That's who they are for and serve. Welcome to the self-serving sleazefest.
Labor unions donate huge amounts of money to democrats, and if you check opensecrets you will see labor unions for middle class workers don't give the republicans anything. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Do you believe worker unions (for teachers, carpenters, food service workers, ex.ex.) will give democrats $100's of millions of dollars for nothing in return? And what do teachers, carpenters, and food service workers want?
Democrats literally support high min wages, healthcare for all, middle class tax cuts, small business tax cuts, small business aid, lowering student loan interest rates, lowering credit card interest rates, ex.ex. but republicans constantly stop democrats from passing those laws.
GW Bush's tax cuts gave the 20% of working Americans making less than $20,000 a year 1.2% of his tax cuts. And Bush gave the richest 1% of Americans 51.8% of his tax cuts. Its called trickle down/supply side economics. Bush Tax Cuts After 2002: June 2002 CTJ Analysis
Or look at Donald Trumps tax cuts. Donald Trumps tax cuts will give the bottom 60% of American workers 13% of his tax cuts. And Trump will give the richest 20% of Americans 70% of his tax cuts. Donald Trump's Tax Plan Would Cost $12 Trillion | CTJReports
I don't want to be rude Steve, but which political party would you vote for?
A.) A political party that supports high min wages, healthcare for all, middle class tax cuts, small business tax cuts, small business aid, lowering student loan interest rates, and lowering credit card interest rates.
B.) A political party that opposes all of the above and supports tax cuts for the rich.
And Donald Trumps tax cuts will add $24.5 trillion dollars to our national debt in the next 20 years. Trump
Which party would you vote for?
A.) A political party that wants to add $24.5 trillion dollars to our national debt by giving the richest 20% of Americans tax cuts.
B.) A political party that will add 1/10 the above amount of money to our national debt, and give significant tax cuts to low income workers and the middle class.
Labor unions donate huge amounts of money to democrats, and if you check opensecrets you will see labor unions for middle class workers don't give the republicans anything. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Do you believe worker unions (for teachers, carpenters, food service workers, ex.ex.) will give democrats $100's of millions of dollars for nothing in return? And what do teachers, carpenters, and food service workers want?
Democrats literally support high min wages, healthcare for all, middle class tax cuts, small business tax cuts, small business aid, lowering student loan interest rates, lowering credit card interest rates, ex.ex. but republicans constantly stop democrats from passing those laws.
GW Bush's tax cuts gave the 20% of working Americans making less than $20,000 a year 1.2% of his tax cuts. And Bush gave the richest 1% of Americans 51.8% of his tax cuts. Its called trickle down/supply side economics. Bush Tax Cuts After 2002: June 2002 CTJ Analysis
Or look at Donald Trumps tax cuts. Donald Trumps tax cuts will give the bottom 60% of American workers 13% of his tax cuts. And Trump will give the richest 20% of Americans 70% of his tax cuts. Donald Trump's Tax Plan Would Cost $12 Trillion | CTJReports
I don't want to be rude Steve, but which political party would you vote for?
A.) A political party that supports high min wages, healthcare for all, middle class tax cuts, small business tax cuts, small business aid, lowering student loan interest rates, and lowering credit card interest rates.
B.) A political party that opposes all of the above and supports tax cuts for the rich.
And Donald Trumps tax cuts will add $24.5 trillion dollars to our national debt in the next 20 years. Trump
Which party would you vote for?
A.) A political party that wants to add $24.5 trillion dollars to our national debt by giving the richest 20% of Americans tax cuts.
B.) A political party that will add 1/10 the above amount of money to our national debt, and give significant tax cuts to low income workers and the middle class.
I have no respect for unions.Once upon a time ago, I think they were really for workers rights. Today I believe all they care about is their dues. I think like so many other things in life, the original good intent gets lost and it ain't so pretty anymore.
Not rude to ask me about my party affiliation, no worries. It's none. Nadda. Zero. In AZ, we can pick lots of choices. My registry is non affiliated, forgot the official term, but I'm affiliated with no party and I really like that. I wish they had a "none of the above/I don't trust any politician" party. This year? In some races, I might vote for my favorite citrus tree in my yard....maybe a cactus.....or the nice dog next door, all as write ins. If you get a chance, look up "George Carlin why I don't vote" on youtube. It's a short 3 minute or so video and sums up pretty well where I stand. I'd post it here but I think it would get banned pretty quick for the obvious reasons after you watch it.
Your talking points from politicians in my view are nothing but that....talking points where the vast majority of it is just lip service/nothing is fulfilled. If the money/backers want it to happen? Sure, I think it could happen by chance if a backer benefits from it all. On to real world example why I believe the way I do but I'll use one of the top of my head/there are countless one's but I won't bore you with a bunch.....remember obama saying he was going to cut the federal deficiet in half in the first few years I believe of his first term...remember that? Where are we now...almost 20 trillion, a pile of it under his term. This is what I expect and see time after time after time from these clowns. Not sure how old you are but I've been around a few election cycles and seen this movie before so if you want to believe the promises, more power to ya. I've gotten wise over the years and I'm far away from the hopeful/believe lots of things it sounds like you believe in when I was in my 20's. When I got into my 30's, it started to dawn on my the scripted reality of it all/who's being served here in the end....hint....it's ain't you and me.
Can you view the following and tell me how....how......HOW in the world you can come to such a conclusion?
This is not R vs D, lib vs conv....it's simple compare and contrasting statements and what I think any rational person would call outright lying that anyone can clearly see. And the first 2 videos are statements made by someone under an fbi criminal investigation. And you even go to the point of saying you trust this person? These statements made by the fbi director against clinton.....this is someone you trust? Someone who sounds like they are ready to run our country in the most highest position?
Above, where I said I thought she just didn't remember everything... Here's is part of the transcript from Comey:
Quote:
From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.
The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional e-mails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private e-mail domain. Others we found by reviewing the archived government e-mail accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as Secretary Clinton, including high-ranking officials at other agencies, people with whom a Secretary of State might naturally correspond.
This helped us recover work-related e-mails that were not among the 30,000 produced to State. Still others we recovered from the laborious review of the millions of e-mail fragments dumped into the slack space of the server decommissioned in 2013.
With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been “up-classified.”
I should add here that we found no evidence that any of the additional work-related e-mails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them. Our assessment is that, like many e-mail users, Secretary Clinton periodically deleted e-mails or e-mails were purged from the system when devices were changed. Because she was not using a government account—or even a commercial account like Gmail—there was no archiving at all of her e-mails, so it is not surprising that we discovered e-mails that were not on Secretary Clinton’s system in 2014, when she produced the 30,000 e-mails to the State Department.
It could also be that some of the additional work-related e-mails we recovered were among those deleted as “personal” by Secretary Clinton’s lawyers when they reviewed and sorted her e-mails for production in 2014.
The lawyers doing the sorting for Secretary Clinton in 2014 did not individually read the content of all of her e-mails, as we did for those available to us; instead, they relied on header information and used search terms to try to find all work-related e-mails among the reportedly more than 60,000 total e-mails remaining on Secretary Clinton’s personal system in 2014. It is highly likely their search terms missed some work-related e-mails, and that we later found them, for example, in the mailboxes of other officials or in the slack space of a server.
It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.
We have conducted interviews and done technical examination to attempt to understand how that sorting was done by her attorneys. Although we do not have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that sorting, we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort.
Hillary must have had 70,000+ emails originally. Out of that 70,000, 110 (in 52 e-mail chains which I imagine would be reponses chained to the original e-mails the way most people in offices respond to email). So, classified mail was .0015 of the e-mails on her system or 1/10 of 1%. Considering her age, how busy her job was, how many emails she had -- I think she just forgot or didn't notice that they were classified. She's not really computer savvy and I wouldn't expect her to be. She probably felt her server was safe because burglars couldn't get it (protected by secret service).
You'll notice that Comey didn't say that she tried to hide them or anything else. She just did "normal" deleting like you or I might do to clean our inbox.
So, you can throw up all you want but I think she's a lot more trustworthy than Trump, who is being sued for fraud and other things.
I have no respect for unions. Maybe once upon a time ago, they were really for workers rights. Today I believe all they care about is their dues.
Not rude to ask me about my party affiliation. It's none. Nadda. Zero. In AZ, we can pick lots of choices. My registry is non affiliated, forgot the official term, but I'm affiliated with no party and I really like that. I wish they had a "none of the above/I don't trust any politician" party.
Your talking points are nothing but that....talking points where the vast majority of it is just lip service/nothing is fulfilled. Remember obama saying he was going to cut the federal deficiet in half in the first few years I believe of his first term...remember that? Where are we now...almost 20 trillion, a pile of it under his term. This is what I expect and see time after time after time from these clowns. Not sure how old you are but I've been around a few election cycles and seen this movie before so if you want to believe the promises, more power to ya. I've gotten wise over the years and I'm far away from the hopeful/believe lots of things it sounds like you believe in when I was in my 20's.
No one thinks it's crazy that Judicial Watch is still investigating WhiteWater?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
These statements made by the fbi director against clinton.....this is someone you trust? Someone who sounds like they are ready to run our country in the most highest position?
This year? In some races, I might vote for my favorite citrus tree in my yard....maybe a cactus.....or the nice dog next door, all as write ins. If you get a chance, look up "George Carlin why I don't vote" on youtube. It's a short 3 minute or so video and sums up pretty well where I stand. I'd post it here but I think it would get banned pretty quick for the obvious reasons after you watch it. 
