Steve Forbes: IG Report Makes DoJ Inaction Impossible - Expects Biden to be Nominee

[berni_mccoy]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2016/05/31/how-state-department-igs-report-on-clintons-emails-could-lead-to-joe-biden-becoming-democratic-nominee/#17806de255f4

THE THOROUGH and devastating report by the State Department’s Inspector General concerning Hillary Clinton’s emails has blasted away all the former Secretary of State’s excuses and rationales. For instance, Clinton never received legal permission of any sort for what she did. She knowingly jeopardized national security. She and her aides tried to stonewall the investigation. By the way, the IG was appointed by President Obama, so Clinton can’t claim these findings were politically motivated by a GOP holdover.

Other officials have faced serious charges for offenses far less serious.

The Clinton campaign is counting on public indifference and confusion to blunt any lasting fallout. Unstated also is perhaps the belief that the egregiously politicized Obama Justice Department will make sure the ongoing FBI investigation ends up going nowhere, with, at worst, a homogenized finding of unintentional carelessness.

But the ex-Secretary and her spinners may be overlooking the train of consequences that the IG has set in motion: The IG has exposed the sordid mess, so how can the Justice Department now do anything less without exposing itself to the unavoidable charge of shilling and engaging in an effective cover-up for the presumed Democratic presidential nominee? The IG’s unassailable findings could well force Justice’s hand in a way the Clinton campaign hasn’t calculated. The more conspiratorial-minded Clintonians might also ponder the leak of the investigation of Governor Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, a man long close to Bill and Hillary. Why the leak now?

Could Hillary Clinton’s nomination be derailed at this late date, considering her overwhelming lead in delegates and primary popular vote totals?

Indeed, it could.

[JoePhilly]

1. Steve Forbes ... LOL!!

[lagomorph777]

77. Flat-Tax-Forbes is wrong about most things, including a "ringer" nominee (Biden),

but for once he is right about the fallout of this disaster.

Why do you suppose 50% of Americans in a recent Rasmussen poll (I know, I know, shit organization) want Hillary to keep running even if indicted?

I figure 25% are Hillary loyalists, and 25% are pukes who would love to run against an indicted crook.

[asuhornets]

2. "Expects Biden to be Nominee" eventhough he is not running!!!

[1939]

75. Should Hillary have to drop out before the conventions due to health or legal problems

Her delegates do not automatically go to Sanders. The convention could nominate Biden, O'Malley, Warren, or Anthony Weiner. It is up to the delegates.

After the convention, if Clinton had to withdraw, the Democratic National Committee would have to choose a replacement and the second place finisher is not guaranteed the spot. They could choose whoever the VP is or Harry Reid or Eric Holder. The last time something like this happened was 1972 when the VP nominee (Eagleton) withdrew and the presidential nominee (McGovern) and the DNC chose Sargent Shriver as the new VP nominee.

[Trust Buster]

3. Do you even know who Forbes is ? He is the originator of the flat tax movement. Perhaps you

value his thoughts, I don't. It might be time to rename this site RU.

[Cal33]

9. If a flat tax should be really carried out with no loop-holes, we'd probably be better off than

Last edited Wed Jun 1, 2016, 09:11 AM - Edit history (1)

we are today, where the largest corporations pay little or no tax, and some of them even
receive government subsidies. In other words, not only do some pay no tax, they also
get rewarded for paying no tax -- and at the taxpayer's expense.

[Trust Buster]

11. Yes, tell that to the author of this thread. The author seems to admire Forbes.

[Cal33]

25. Here's a link that might interest you:

http://www.cheatsheet.com/business/high-on-the-hog-the-top-8-corporate-welfare-recipients.html/?a=viewall

[riversedge]

30. The author of the OP is the new Camp Weathervane-it switches to whoevery smears Hillary.

[lancer78]

65. A flat tax

hurts the poor more than the rich as the rich have more money to pay the tax.

[asuhornets]

4. why r u doing this to yourself? nt

[hack89]

5. Steve Forbes is a republican politician who will support Trump in the election

has it ever crossed your mind that he might be biased? Or do you trust him because he is saying what you want to hear?

[still_one]

6. Steve Forbes has been wrong on everything for years.

[still_one]

16. Forgetting politics, his economic views are nuts. Yes, we will agree on

Steve Forbes

His flat tax only benefits the 1%, and hurts the poor and middle class

[Hiraeth]

17. I don't get the Biden thing, either.

Because he is currently VEEP ... is that the logic?

[still_one]

22. He is trying to make both Sanders and Clinton supporters upset

[Hiraeth]

24. I get that but, what makes it legal precedent for consideration? Biden is not seeking the party

nomination therefore even it this is "legal" wouldn't the odds of Biden refusing be pretty high?

[merrily]

28. Remember all the polls early on with Biden in them?

We all wondered what he was doing in the polls, since he was not running?

[Hiraeth]

80. Yeah, I didn't get that, either

[merrily]

82. Is it making more sense now?

[Hiraeth]

83. I am going with

Forbes is talking out his ass on this one.

[merrily]

84. Forget Forbes. He is not the first or the second or third to suggest Biden will

be the political deus ex machina if the Party PTB decide Hillary will be too much of a risk in the general.

All I'm saying is, what seemed bizarre months ago, when they kept including Biden in the polls seems a lot less odd now.

[Hiraeth]

93. It didnt make sense then and it doesn't make sense now.

[still_one]

76. Forbes doesn't know what he is talking about

[Hiraeth]

81. now that, I buy!

[Jitter65]

7. More unfounded hype and wishful thinking. nt

[BootinUp]

8. Steve Forbes? BWAAHAAAAAHAAAA

[BeyondGeography]

10. Flat Earth Forbes?

[mmonk]

12. .

[stillwaiting]

13. If that happened it would explain why Biden continued to make positive statements towards Bernie

throughout this primary.

He would have been setting the table to unify the Party after HRC was taken out of the picture.

I, for one, have never believed Biden's statements were truly genuine. Or, if they were genuine, that those statements would have had more of an impact over how he would govern than the neoliberal actions and strong defense of corporate interests (over average American interests) that have epitomized his career.

But, it could have been a savvy political move. We'll see.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. And now there were 7 national papers

With devastating editorials

[MineralMan]

18. Who cares what Steve Forbes thinks?

Seriously. Why are we listening to Republicans during the Democratic primaries?

[greatauntoftriplets]

19. Especially ones worth about $430 million.

Isn't he one of the dreaded oligarchs?

[MineralMan]

20. Indeed. It's amazing how much anti-hillary stuff is sourced

from right wing writers at right-wing publications and websites. It makes a guy wonder about the people who are posting those things. Every time I see an attack on Clinton from a right-wing outlet, I have to just shake my head in confusion.

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. I stopped wondering, months ago.

[berni_mccoy]

34. Who cares what Rupert Murdoch thinks? Oh right...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2091481

[MineralMan]

37. Well, old stories from 2006 aren't really that interesting, are they?

That thread is just rehashing old news.

[pdsimdars]

21. While I agree this should cause Hillary to drop out, I didn't see any rationale

for the "Biden as nominee" conclusion. That is quite a leap in my mind.

Bernie has earned it. Bernie's voters have fought for it. What has Biden done to earn this election? If they anoint Biden, it will cause such a mess the Democrats will lose the election. That is just nonsense, top down, elitist thinking. . . imagining that 'the masses' are some kind of generic unit that can be moved from here to there.

I don't agree with that kind of superficial thinking. I'd like to see where they got the polling data that said all Bernie supporters would just switch and go for Biden.

Bernie is the ONE candidate that has shown he has the energy and enthusiasm in the party. Biden does not. Do the Democrats want to keep the party vital or do they want to keep it elitist and authoritarian? You can't impose someone on the public and still be "democratic". That doesn't work.

[yourpaljoey]

35. Good luck with that

First, they have to wake Joe up.
Second, they have to make sure he knows what year it is.
Third, they have to make sure he keeps his mouth shut at
all times.

This man is so out of the loop it is frightening.

Joe's great quotes: "Duh" "Doh" Bdoe" "Did I say that?"
and "What year is it, again?"

The voters will NEVER accept this deceit.

[scscholar]

56. If you substitute Bernie for Joe in your quote....

it's still valid, especially given yesterday. Don't throw stones...

[pdsimdars]

64. Any kind of even the smallest thought put into that "Biden" thing exposes it for nonsense

But they keep saying it over and over. I wonder if it's supposed to be some trial balloon? In any case, it is such a stupid idea totally unconnected to reality.

[yourpaljoey]

86. The People will never accept that

He's Hillary Lite.
Exactly what the Rock ain't cookin.'

His answers during Trump debates will be things like (regardless of the question):

1. Yes, I believe I will have another piece of that pecan pah
2. Good SIR! NOT!!!... I shall not give out my hair dressers name!
3. What country club am I joining here?

Rip roaring, cutting-edge Joe!

[PotatoChip]

92. I've seen a Biden/Warren ticket being floated around

for the past couple of weeks or so.

I'm not sure what to make of it, but have noticed that Joe has been in the news more lately. Or at least it seems that way to me...

[BootinUp]

23. Open your blinkered eyes. This guy is AFRAID of what Hillary will do in office. nt

[Gomez163]

26. Please Skinner, make this stop.

[Amaril]

33. Read the rules

We are free to voice our opinions / discuss ALL aspects of the ongoing primary race *until* a nominee has been OFFICIALLY named. That hasn't happened yet, so just stop.

[senz]

49. You can't handle news about Hillary?

[riversedge]

27. now your gravel at every word Steve Forbes say. ha ha. You are campweathervane-and switch

alliance to whoever smears Hillary.

[1StrongBlackMan]

29. Just in from the "Any Port in a Storm" segment of DU ...

I remember when DUers would be embarrassed to cite/post the opinion of Steve Forbes ... even if they happen to agree with it.

[berni_mccoy]

32. It's ok for Hillary though?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2091481

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. ATTENDING a fundraiser is exactly like citing to a rightwinger to attack a Democrat. Right?

[berni_mccoy]

43. I know right?!?! Taking $$$ from Rupert Murdoch is MUCH Worse. Thanks for agreeing to that.

Hillary is a horrible candidate.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. Your newsflash is a decade old.

[berni_mccoy]

50. And yet she continues taking bg money from him as late as 2014. Gotta read man

Read the entire article. I know you hill fans shun the light but facts man facts.

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. I know that somehow makes sense to you; but, how can an article written in 2006 ...

state what occurred in 2014?

I know you hill fans shun the light but facts man facts.

Making your "facts man facts" dig(?), all the more ridiculous.

[berni_mccoy]

60. If you read the article at the link I posted...

You would see it posts several articles up to and including info from 2016.

[1StrongBlackMan]

63. Ahhh ... missed the 2nd and 3rd links. Sorry.

[frylock]

36. DU rec for pissing off all the RIGHT people.

[realmirage]

40. That moment when you realize you've become a

http://m.imgur.com/GPshdb3?r

[frylock]

45. First graduating class of Brock U. calling me a troll?

[realmirage]

47. I can get paid to support the winner and best candidate?

Where do I sign up?? You have a link?

[frylock]

51. Where ever it was you signed up initially.

I don't know how it works out. I suppose the Brock people contacted your hiring agency.

[realmirage]

55. I'd really like to get paid for supporting Hillary

Can you give me more info on how to get paid to do what I enjoy doing for free?

Any info would be appreciated.

[frylock]

59. I think I just did.

Can I talk to your manager, please?

[TwilightZone]

39. Steve Forbes? lol. Yes, Mr. Flat Tax to the rescue.

[leeroysphitz]

41. Teve Torbes?

[BootinUp]

42. Hillary Loves Forbes Hate. nt

[realmirage]

46. Free advertisment for Hillary

[realmirage]

44. Bumping this so all can see what the anti-Hillarys have become

Couldn't have discredited their own argument better than this. Love it!

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. You realize that editorial board after editorial

Board is writing scathing pieces due to the OIG report right? I know, Stste is part of that vast right wing conspiracy

[realmirage]

57. And yet it is right wing nut magazine Forbes that is linked to

Innnntteresstinggg. I'm sure there are no Trump supporters hiding here. Surely there can't be with all these republican sources popping up everywhere.

Surely

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. You might want to pay attention

The most devastating of the editorials posted was the USA today one.

Oh and this is a new media narrative.

[realmirage]

68. The "most devastating"

This thread links to Forbes. And right wingers here seem to agree with it. True democrats also like it because it reveals that the Hillary hate has always been coming from the right. And some people claiming to be democrats have decided that Forbes, breitbart, and Fox News are now good sources.

can those people really be called democrats?

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. Silly folks have been posting them as OPs

And I find the bunker mentality predictable and hilarious. Let me join you...

[vintx]

72. Infants don't understand object permanence...

It seems Hillary fans don't understand information permanence

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. It is human psychology at play

To be fair, many Sanders folks think he will win.

I am far more concerned about a national party not giving the WH to a fascist. That is the true danger here

[realmirage]

74. i bet a lot of these same people scoffed at

the PUMAs in 08.

If you aren't for the Democratic Party you are either a hermit living in a cave in the woods, or a republican, or in one of those other parties that will never win. The only party standing between America and oblivion is the DNC

[deathrind]

53. The IG report.

Clearly shows intent and obstruction took place alone that should be enough to compel the DoJ into action on this...but I am not going to hold my breath.

Lanny Breuer proved that the DoJ could have a mountain of evidence and still not take action.

[Mike Nelson]

58. Steve Forbes...

...doesn't like Hillary Clinton. That's good enough for me... to like her!

[BillZBubb]

61. Steve Forbes doesn't like Putin and Assad. Do you like them?

[BootinUp]

67. This guy (Forbes) stands for everything Bernie is against, everything Democrats are against.

Talk about mental gymnastics. Your post should be bronze plated, lol.

[vintx]

69. They are completely impervious to logic. nt

[demwing]

85. That's staggeringly illogical

I always encourage people to vote, but will make an exception for you.

Don't vote...you're just making things worse

[Ferd Berfel]

66. Whether you like Forbes or not (I don't) HE is expressing the Republican position

get it?

Unless Obama pardons her (Pardon Hillary!: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2071020)

The republicans are going to stay on it permanently: hearings, investigations, subpoenas, grand juries........ etc, etc ,etc

Who's side will M$M take during all of this? It'll make good ratings - eh?

Clinton is a suicidal path for the country and Party

[SidDithers]

71. The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary...

But they both love former Republican Presidential candidate Steve Forbes.

Sid

[BillZBubb]

87. What rubbish. Yes the right hates Hillary. Most on the left hate her policies.

We've already got one republican party. Hillary and her ilk want us to have two.

[Waiting For Everyman]

73. So interesting

that the messengER must be oh-so-pure, so pure as to be perfect in fact or the message somehow doesn't count, and yet any amount of wrong done by the candidate is just fine, no problem.

That's some nonsense!

[zappaman]

78. Yup, get it all out while you can.

Gonna miss you when you're gone.

[COLGATE4]

88. Steve Forbes?????

[Dem2]

89. Now we're using known Republican trolls as sources. huh.

There is no depth that is too low for the slanderous attack machine.

[amborin]

90. she has to be indicted or there is no rule of law

[Samantha]

91. I have been thinking about this and I do believe you are right

I read a post here a little bit ago that said Clinton will not be indicted for the same reason Bush* was not indicted. My personal perspective on that was that both Bush* and Cheney should have been indicted. The fact they were not rubberstamped illegal acts to be performed by our elected officials with no punitive action to be taken against them.

The Bushes and the Clintons are friends. I am thinking they are probably like minded people. Since the rule of thumb seems to be now one can do whatever he or she wants to do, just try not to get caught, but if caught, deny, deny, deny. Call in your friends in high places to help you out.

If no one in authority stands up and this this stops here, no one is above the law, it will only worsen to the point it can never be fixed.

Sam