2016 Postmortem

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)

101. I'm a retired attorney and I'm with you 100%. n/t

Reply to JudyM (Reply #81)

Thu Jun 30, 2016, 10:45 PM

Jun 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

171 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bill C. meets Loretta L. at the airport.. stop the presses!!! [View all] Peacetrain Jun 2016 OP

Actually it was on her plane Press Virginia Jun 2016 #1

it only looks bad if you buy hook, line, and sinker into the completely unsubstantiated insinuations La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #2

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #4

No, it looks bad without insinuations. It wasn't happenstance, Bill sought out the meeting. morningfog Jun 2016 #5

it's not an unforced error. Waiting to say hi to someone important in the party, is normal behavior La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #6

That's not what happened. Bill sought her out, requested access to her on the plane. morningfog Jun 2016 #8

he knew she was going to be there, he waited to say hi and came into her plane to do so La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #10

Judge in a trial over a cop shooting a black teen gets seen playing golf Press Virginia Jun 2016 #12

+10 99th_Monkey Jun 2016 #19

It would be even worse if the judge were gulfing with the cop's spouse. amandabeech Jun 2016 #94

Unethical? No evidence of that. Bad optics? Most definitely. morningfog Jun 2016 #14

Precisely right... it surely was a dumb move. InAbLuEsTaTe Jun 2016 #139

"AG could have just said NO," scscholar Jun 2016 #26

She apparently didn't even know he was coming onto the plane until he entered. morningfog Jun 2016 #34

The AG is subject to the ethical rules of her bar associations and of the DOJ. amandabeech Jun 2016 #98

It is inappropriate by legal ethical standards. The fact that she may not abide by those standards JudyM Jun 2016 #32

Are you a legal ethicist? La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #39

That would be an academic, and I am not an academic. JudyM Jun 2016 #43

So no, right ? La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #76

This message was self-deleted by its author JudyM Jun 2016 #84

I am a specialist in this field, as I said. If you want to call it something else, feel free. JudyM Jun 2016 #81

I'm a retired attorney and I'm with you 100%. n/t amandabeech Jun 2016 #101

Yep. Technically, it's her behavior that's the clearer problem, in not immediately walking him back JudyM Jun 2016 #133

I am completely and thorougly disgusted, just like you. amandabeech Jun 2016 #137

Yes, kindred souls, always appreciate that in a person! JudyM Jul 2016 #154

Yes it is! amandabeech Jul 2016 #161

Wow! Go Bill! panader0 Jul 2016 #152

Unles you're "bonding" about it. JudyM Jul 2016 #155

Oh dear gods. He "sought her out." Was she willing? Did he ply her with liquor? Oh the evil! Hekate Jun 2016 #49

Sorry if the facts get you worked up. morningfog Jun 2016 #73

a private meeting isn't the same as a public conversation at a party. Press Virginia Jun 2016 #9

Agree. floriduck Jun 2016 #13

When you do stuff like this, you're just setting yourself up for an attack from your opponents. Svafa Jun 2016 #16

Yep. Appearances matter. Press Virginia Jun 2016 #18

Is Bill Clinton under some kind of investigation? jberryhill Jun 2016 #57

we're going to pretend there's not an investigation that may or may not be targeting his wife? Press Virginia Jun 2016 #60

So what? jberryhill Jun 2016 #63

Some would say yes. I think she just should have declined the meeting to avoid Press Virginia Jun 2016 #65

"some" would say anything jberryhill Jun 2016 #66

Yes. And that relationship is the reason to avoid things like this Press Virginia Jun 2016 #67

AG Lynch has formal ethical requirements as set forth by any bar association amandabeech Jun 2016 #108

Nonsense jberryhill Jun 2016 #129

My opinion, and I am a real lawyer admitted in two states, although retired. amandabeech Jun 2016 #148

What official, non-Republican source says that the FBI is investigating pnwmom Jul 2016 #159

Last autumn the NYT reported that the Clinton Foundation amandabeech Jul 2016 #160

The only NYT report I saw was attributed to an anonymous source. pnwmom Jul 2016 #162

Sorry. It was the Washington Post in February, referring to subpoenas amandabeech Jul 2016 #163

You are simply incorrect. If your friends think what she did was ethically ok they need to retake JudyM Jul 2016 #156

He's not, as far as we know. morningfog Jun 2016 #79

The use of the server in his home is NOT the "subject of a criminal investigation"!!! George II Jun 2016 #118

The FBI, which is a part of the Department of Justice, is investigation amandabeech Jun 2016 #115

It only "looks bad" to people who want it to look bad. Over the years I've run into a lot.... George II Jun 2016 #123

No, it looks bad to people who understand jobs that require Press Virginia Jul 2016 #153

On Morning Joe, Joe said ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #3

What's your take on the two meeting? NWCorona Jun 2016 #7

I have no opinion. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #15

Ok nt NWCorona Jun 2016 #17

I tend not to speculate about stuff. That's called gossipping/rumor-mongering. ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #21

This site would be very boring without the stuff you mentioned lol NWCorona Jun 2016 #22

LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #25

Is there any other reason he would have to meet with her? He hasn't been in office for years. JudyM Jun 2016 #29

The only thing that I can think of that would have the best outcome for Loretta NWCorona Jun 2016 #35

If Bill Clinton and the AG wanted to discuss anything inappropriate, they have numerous ways and EffieBlack Jul 2016 #151

" I think folks are just looking for things to get worked up over." NWCorona Jul 2016 #158

Link? MohRokTah Jun 2016 #55

Take a look below ... backed up, dear. By DOJ itself. Apparently you've missed it every time JudyM Jun 2016 #69

Nope, not a fact. Does not come up on any Google search MohRokTah Jun 2016 #70

Put on yer glasses. The link is right there. JudyM Jun 2016 #71

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #59

This has been reported many times in this forum, but here you are... JudyM Jun 2016 #68

Nope, that is not an actual DOJ fiing. MohRokTah Jun 2016 #72

Nuts. It's a court filing, like it or not. I'm not here to convince anyone who rejects reality. JudyM Jun 2016 #75

Discussed this a couple months ago. Depends upon how leveymg Jun 2016 #80

Now *would* be the time. JudyM Jun 2016 #83

Judge Sullivan referred to it as a criminal investigation. morningfog Jun 2016 #86

You made the assertion, you are under the burden of proof. MohRokTah Jun 2016 #90

Ha, that's crazy. Not interested in wasting time since I believe it; it's consistent with what's JudyM Jun 2016 #95

I believe the document is genuine. On the other hand, its language is ambiguous on a couple points leveymg Jul 2016 #167

That is a public filing by the DOJ's office. It's real. morningfog Jun 2016 #85

I still do not buy it is real MohRokTah Jun 2016 #89

Lol. It's real. The DOJ does not publish its filings in cases morningfog Jun 2016 #91

Jason Leopold published this document MohRokTah Jun 2016 #93

Leopold is the plaintiff. It's a court filed document. morningfog Jun 2016 #100

Then link to the document in that database MohRokTah Jun 2016 #103

Lol. morningfog Jun 2016 #109

Not buying it MohRokTah Jun 2016 #110

You are obviously not the arbitor of that. morningfog Jun 2016 #114

I am not under the burden of proof here MohRokTah Jun 2016 #119

Have you ever read a filing in a federal case? You can't link to it. morningfog Jun 2016 #124

If a private citizen is the plaintiff, okasha Jun 2016 #121

Slow down. This is a DOJ filing in a civil case. morningfog Jun 2016 #126

In other words, okasha Jun 2016 #130

This tells us that the investigation was referred to the FBI by morningfog Jun 2016 #132

None of it is new to anyone who's been paying attention. okasha Jun 2016 #140

Get a Pacer Account. It's in there. You wouldn't believe me, either, even if I reposted it. leveymg Jul 2016 #168

They have had a political relationship for over 17 years. KMOD Jun 2016 #92

If you think for a second that there was no discussion of the investigations I've got a bridge JudyM Jun 2016 #96

If there was any discussion, KMOD Jun 2016 #111

Too funny. And you have this special knowledge how?? You were on the plane? JudyM Jun 2016 #136

lol KMOD Jun 2016 #142

That's what politics is kacekwl Jun 2016 #78

I'll tell you my take on it. I watched the show this morning, and if you checked out the link to politicaljunkie41910 Jun 2016 #61

+1000. n/t pnwmom Jul 2016 #164

Well gee, if Joke Scarborough says so... Lord Magus Jun 2016 #27

But banging his co host is AOK DemFromPittsburgh Jun 2016 #52

Was everyone on the plane still alive after their meeting? Zambero Jun 2016 #58

They talked about his grandchildren. BlueNoMatterWho Jun 2016 #11

And their golf scores too. n/t 99th_Monkey Jun 2016 #20

And the weather. Probably. BlueNoMatterWho Jun 2016 #23

I've supported Hillary from day one. nolawarlock Jun 2016 #24

Thanks for being rational. It's just bad optics, fodder for the right and an unforced error. morningfog Jun 2016 #33

I loved Bill as president. nolawarlock Jun 2016 #149

As a former prez madamesilverspurs Jun 2016 #28

... NWCorona Jun 2016 #31

According to CNN, he invited himself on her private plane. Zen Democrat Jun 2016 #30

Even if only discussing "grandchildren" he is an extremely powerful and connected man with JudyM Jun 2016 #36

It is on front pages. 840high Jun 2016 #37

Unfortunately BlueNoMatterWho Jun 2016 #40

Why are you peddling RW crap here? Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #45

White House said it's a legitimate question why 840high Jun 2016 #56

Unfortunately, this is not right wing crap. amandabeech Jun 2016 #122

this is huge! zappaman Jun 2016 #38

I think it is nothing, but the ethics code for the Department of Justice... GeorgiaPeanuts Jun 2016 #41

Also this is an apparent breach of legal ethics for her, not just the DOJ ethics code. JudyM Jun 2016 #42

Also, if everything they had to say was so harmless, why couldn't Bill just phone her? snot Jun 2016 #131

Yeah mcar Jun 2016 #44

Yeah see, never mind the decades of GOPers meeting at the end of piers. Rex Jun 2016 #46

Has anyone realized that Bill could have call Loretta at home on the phone .... CajunBlazer Jun 2016 #47

+1 Hekate Jun 2016 #50

Exactly. spooky3 Jun 2016 #99

Have you realized Lynch would likely not take his call? morningfog Jun 2016 #102

Have you considered that yoiu don't know what you are talking about|||? CajunBlazer Jun 2016 #125

I haven't claimed to. But the same could be said to you, right? morningfog Jun 2016 #128

I made a logical assumption. You made an illogical assumption. CajunBlazer Jun 2016 #141

No. You made a simple assumption. I offered a response that morningfog Jun 2016 #144

Whatever, I only argue with logical people CajunBlazer Jun 2016 #146

I have no idea who you are referring to now. morningfog Jun 2016 #147

+1 (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #135

Seriously smh... Quayblue Jul 2016 #170

If there was collusion all Clinton had to do was pick up the phone Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #48

+2 Hekate Jun 2016 #51

+1000! DemonGoddess Jun 2016 #53

From NPR.. 840high Jun 2016 #64

Now why would you post this? CajunBlazer Jun 2016 #82

You have me confused with someone 840high Jul 2016 #157

I don't think there is any collision. I respect Lynch as a professional. morningfog Jun 2016 #88

If he talked about anything improper, by your same reasoning. spooky3 Jun 2016 #105

Absolutely, that is exactly what I would expect she would say. morningfog Jun 2016 #112

Or met her in a parking garage st two am. okasha Jun 2016 #127

Exactly the opposite. snot Jun 2016 #134

I have always said.. coco77 Jun 2016 #54

Sometimes I wonder if he isn't deliberately trying to sabotage her campaign dflprincess Jun 2016 #87

Everybody who is somebody knows the "email fishing expedition" is over. oasis Jun 2016 #113

Lol day after Benghazi falls apart Lance Bass esquire Jun 2016 #62

No shit!! ronnykmarshall Jun 2016 #74

It does not matter, whatever the Clintons say and do is always a Iliyah Jun 2016 #77

^^^This!!! DemonGoddess Jun 2016 #104

If he were up to no good, wouldn't he be a lot sneakier about it? spooky3 Jun 2016 #97

There were no witnesses except maybe Lynch's husband. morningfog Jun 2016 #106

Sorry, I'm just not buying your interpretation. spooky3 Jun 2016 #107

There is no interpretation. Those are facts. morningfog Jun 2016 #116

Sorry, I'm not buying your interpretation. Have a good evening. spooky3 Jun 2016 #117

What interpretation? morningfog Jun 2016 #120

So what? Lynch described what they talked about. Are you accusing the Attorney General of lying? LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #138

I am absolutely not accusing Lynch of lying. morningfog Jun 2016 #143

Anything Bill Clinton does will look bad to people who want him to look bad (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #145

Uh-huh. Like having his cell phone dial her cell phone. pnwmom Jul 2016 #166

I thought Bill met Loretta Lynn at the airport and wondered why the big deal. betsuni Jun 2016 #150

I know. Like he couldn't pick up his phone and call her at home anytime pnwmom Jul 2016 #165

It was a stupid thing to do democrattotheend Jul 2016 #169

It has all the signs of a classic display of power. aikoaiko Jul 2016 #171