Waiting For Everyman
Waiting For Everyman's JournalNo, but he has the power to torpedo HRC in an instant if he did.
Maybe that fact ought to be kept in mind a bit more. So long as he doesn't do it, he is doing her the VERY BIGGEST FAVOR POSSIBLE. (And an equally huge favor, not mentioning the FBI.)
Does she act at all grateful? Hell NO. And that tells a lot about who she is, who her followers are, what the Dem Party has become, and what this election is about.
He could pull the plug on her anytime he wanted.
Now keep smearing and lying about the man. (not you pinebox, generally meant)
All he needs to have is a "fuck this" moment.
He's like the guy holding the pin in the grenade. Go ahead, tackle him to play these stupid games.
"Those who DIDN'T GET TO VOTE in Primaries WILL NOT be on her side..."
Your whole post summed up the situation very well, and that one statement especially jumped out at me.
We're constantly aware of the difference in results when Independents are shut out of primaries, but I don't think we look at it from their point of view as far as motivation for a particular candidate in the General Election.
They don't feel included or invested in the process. An analogy might be a conversation among several people in which they are talked over and have no input, and no one is interested in what they have to say. It's boring and insulting when it goes on repeatedly.
Those of us who have been in a party for a long time do not really appreciate how important this is. And now, Independents are 45% of the entire electorate -- the biggest group! Granted, they are not all Dem-leaning, but that isn't the point.
A party that leaves them on the sidelines and doesn't care about their views is not going to have any depth of strength to win.
This is the big thing Bernie has done, which is under-appreciated. For once, they have been brought in and included in the conversation and we see the response. The only problem is, they do not usually take part in primaries and so they are not familiar enough with the process to know the fine points of registering.
Bernie's campaign has been so short on time, that there has not been enough of a chance to inform them properly, as I'm sure he would've liked to do. Of course, the media has been little help as they have become mostly useless.
And now having brought them into the conversation, the Dem party is slapping those people in the face by blatantly railroading their candidate with obvious election rigging and voter fraud, in order to hand the election to the candidate they emphatically don't want. In my opinion, they will turn on this party in droves. Independents do not like dishonesty or unfairness, especially millennials.
I really fail to see how party designation, which is essentially signing up for a meaningless card saying "D" on it, is a reason to disenfranchise a huge swath of people. If someone is going to vote Dem in the General, why is having that "D" card a few months ahead of time a reason to exclude them from choosing which candidate will run via the Primary? It's nonsense!
All of this party allegiance stuff is nonsense at a grass roots voter level, and nobody knows it more clearly than Independents. BUT THEY ARE RIGHT ABOUT THAT.
NOBODY SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE VOTING PROCESS. PERIOD.
Anyway, I realize I'm preaching to the choir because it was your point after all, you just started me thinking. Great post, ChiciB1!
The dickish sore-losership is Boxer's.
Cheaters are dickish sore losers by definition.
If there's more cheating by HRC at the convention, which seems likely, then who would be surprised if that doesn't go well?
HRC and the Dem establishment don't seem to understand something -- we voters don't take orders from them. They don't pay us, and we don't owe them anything -- not even civility if it is undeserved. So they can just get down off of their high horses right now, because we aren't buying any of it.
As Bernie has already explicitly said, we don't take orders from him either.
What can you expect -- that's easy. There are youtube videos of inside the 1968 Chicago convention. Watch them. Pull the same shit, most likely get the same reaction.
Go that way, expect to lose just like then. But "Watergate 2.0" will still happen.
As dark and ugly as it is now,
and it is plenty dark and ugly (especially after what we just saw in NV, following the same script in too many other places), this election has given me a lot of new hope. 1) I'm surprised at how many people support what Bernie stands for, and 2) the fact that the Millennials will be the future, and they seem to learn quickly and have good bullshit radar. And 3) we now know that we can fight big money and win.
I feel very good about Bernie's chances of winning this election, oddly enough, but I feel even more positive about the return of the New Deal 2.0 in the not to distant future as you noted. I guess it's like seeing light at the end of the tunnel, or seeing a away out. I see it now. That's really all I need to get in gear for it.
If it comes to another 1968-syle showdown, which I was part of then too, I'm ready for it. I'm 66, and I have very little left to lose after 4 decades of rip-offs, so I don't give a fuck. My people came here 400 years ago, not 5 minutes ago like too many of our so-called "leaders", and I'll be damned if I'll watch what they built and sacrificed so much for go down the toilet for the benefit of this handful of self-entitled globe-raping grifter-grafters.
There are lots of us of a like mind and demographic, which I'm glad to see here too.
The thing to know and keep in mind is, the PTB have the money which buys power, but we have the NUMBERS. A few cannot hold down the many unless the many allow it. All we have to do is stand up in a big way, and it's game over.
HRC cannot be referred to as "winning" any longer.
As in, the super delegates have to choose her because she is "winning".
This is bullshit, and it's a few straws too many. She is the official CHEATER now, and that deserves no recognition whatsoever.
Especially in light of the fact that by all rights, she shouldn't even be allowed to run while under FBI investigation.
Bernie is the presumptive winner now, and if it doesn't turn out that way, it's a stolen election. Period.
I'm really sad to hear this, CoffeeCat. I'm sad that this happened to you, and Dragonfli, and others, and I'm sad that we have sunk this low in this country. I remember when we used to be mostly honorable people back in the day.
I'm really sick and tired of sharks. It's time to drain the swamp and get rid of them, whatever it takes. People who do this kind of thing, no matter how great they think they are, completely disgust me. They are lower than pond scum.
"I absolutely had permission" is a bald-faced lie too.
More bullshit:
Nothing was marked classified. (That's 100% irrelevant, as she knows.)
No intent to mishandle records. (Intent doesn't enter into it, as she knows.)
Others did it too. (All the State Dept.'s communications for 4 years on a private DIY server does not equal a few emails on a commercial server, as she knows.)
Everything she has said about this, including that it's a right-wing smear, she has known full well was a total LIE. Nothing she says can be relied upon at all.
She is a lawyer. So is Bill Clinton. So is Obama. They all know that her statements on this are nonsense.
This is a deliberate attempt by all involved to CON the voters of America into electing her under FALSE PRETENSES.
That attempt alone, even if nothing else was wrong, disqualifies her and shreds their credibility and integrity (what's left of it).
So far, Obama is the least guilty one in this. But he knew that that "intent" remark he made in her defense was bullshit, and deliberately misleading the public. Not cool.
She had millions in Foundation/State graft to hide too.
It wasn't just thwarting FOIA. (And it isn't the first time the Clinton's have seen to it that the law was broken to foil FOIA; google Sandy Berger.)
There were at least three more reasons. One, to hide Bill's involvement in helping her do her work as SoS, which may have been extensive and could be why having her unsecured and unauthorized Blackberry was so important to her. Two, to hide her own private sources like Blumenthal, possibly amounting to running a private State Dept. behind Obama's back. The extent of the last two points are not certain, but this fourth one is and it was the big one...
She was confident the private server meant that no one would ever find out about the way both Clintons dovetailed State Dept. actions with Foundation donations (for payoffs and laundering) to facilitate some very big deals around the world, between combinations of: foreign governments, our government, donors, and their inner circle of friends.
(If it weren't for a fluke hacker getting into her secret aide Blumenthal's email, all of this would've remained hidden. And the hacker found Blumenthal, because as a Romanian he was following a Romanian woman pol who had a longtime crush on Colin Powell, who led to Petraeus, Bush and others, and through one of them to Blumenthal, then HRC.)
So the 6-figure speeches weren't the only source of millions for the Clintons.
And it wasn't done once, it was done a lot. It's part of the FBI investigation, and RICO has been brought up. If the FBI doesn't touch it, Congress will.
And Hillary's snottiness to Grassley a few weeks back probably didn't do her any good, but that's who she is.
This investigation is not partisan bullshit. It's big, ugly, and serious.
If she gets elected, there's no way she doesn't get impeached. This is all we will hear about until then and this is all that will get done. And next cycle, it will be a big handicap to run against.
It's a sucker bet risk, and the Dem party is taking it.
The point: this equals an EPIC FAIL in her last job as SoS.
It seems to get lost in the shuffle.
She's running for a big promotion. But this is how she handled her last job.
The fact that the FBI is even involved at all, and the fact that two IGs had to make a referral TO the FBI... that says all we need to know about her job performance.
It's one thing to have no experience (like Trump), it's another thing to have experience at completely bungling the job. She screwed up on two levels: on the military actions taken because she pushed them; and on this more bureaucratic national security whopping screw up of records for her entire 4 years as SoS.
WTH is competent about that? That's the point about this investigation. It's an "F" on her report card. It's an objective evaluation of job failure. And that's regardless of whether she's indicted or not.
And that's why she should not be running IN ADDITION TO the fact that no one under the legal jeopardy of an FBI investigation should be running either.
I thought Shrub was the most ludicrous Presidential candidate we could possibly have. But this tops that by far. This is even more ridiculous than Trump as a candidate. At least he hasn't ALREADY FAILED this badly.
And if that still isn't enough, add being Kissinger's protege. And she has the colossal nerve to use the word "dangerous" as criticism in her speeches! WTF, Dem party! This is nonsense. This is "through the looking glass" all the way. smh
Lol! Loveya West Virginia! They took HRC to the woodshed.
West Virginia 
You made my day, and my week!
It's a great thing for these establishment-type corruption puppeteers, to be shown once in a while that although most of the Party is cowed into submission by their "Hit List" of carrots and sticks -- meaning bribes and threats -- that...
SOME. PEOPLE. WILL. NOT. DANCE. TO. THEIR. TUNE. 
She can sit up on Olympus all she wants and pull levers of power and snap her fingers for gum and talk about not needing their votes, but NEVERTHELESS, the voters of West Virginia had their say and
TOLD HER OFF!!! Good for them! 
That was a thing of beauty!
And Kentucky is watching, and waiting for its own chance to spit in her eye!
Not forgetting you Oregon, we know you're ready to be counted! 
Bernie people are so cool. 
I think Hillary is nothing but a front for Kissinger.
And I'm really alarmed that Obama has bought into that too, and has chosen to make a public statement of that fact via the honoring of Kissinger done yesterday. That tells me that the top of the establishment in DC, both Repub and Dem, is Kissinger. Unelected Kissinger, please note.
That makes Hillary much scarier than Trump, Trump is not an insider, at least not yet.
As to the two parties, they may have different platforms and different ideologies but they are run by the same establishment. The Repubs spend for a while on wars or have a crash and run up a bill, and then the Dems cut services and pay for it while telling us to lower expectations. Rinse, repeat.
The establishment is like a pyramid, the higher you go up, the more unified it becomes.
Meanwhile, most people are too self-propagandized to defend themselves from it. And those of us who know better are unable to benefit from being right, because we get screwed over along with everyone else by the choices of the stupid or corrupt among us.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHome country: USA
Member since: Mon Jun 23, 2008, 12:17 PM
Number of posts: 9,385
