• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

Mueller's Investigation of Trump on the ropes.Chart the unravelling here (Second Thread)


O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,814
There is little doubt about the effect of the Comey letter.

The irony is that Comey felt free to send it because he was sure Clinton would win. He dreaded becoming a target for Congressional Republicans when it came out after the election that the investigation into Clinton had been re-opened.

Similarly, over-confidence in Clinton's win lulled a lot of Democrats into staying home or voting for 3rd parties. Trump added ~2 million Republican voters to Romney's 2012 total - about the average that could be expected from population growth. Clinton only added 0.6 million votes to Obama's 2012 total - but still won the popular vote by the largest amount ever. An even bigger popular vote win would have converted into an Electoral College win.

All true IMO. I'd also add the media into that mix where it made a fortune covering Trump's antics rather than anything substantive on the daily grind issues that HRC wished to discuss. They likewise presumed she'd win anyway. Well, she didn't...
 


O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,814
Of course the " benefits arent being shared equally" its America not Swedan !! Have you ever been to the US ?The winner takes all thats their culture.

Unemployment is a 50 year low, the market is at a record high.

Are you suggesting people should jepordise that in order to have the benefits " shared equally". And that they will achieve this by voting for the party of Hillary Goldman Sachs Clinton?

Were you asleep for the last 6 years. Trump could only win because Goldman Sachs was part of " the establishment" . You know expect the US voter to strike against " banks and corporations" by voting for Joe Biden????? Seriously Biden is even more of an insider than Clinton.

Good luck with that one!!!
"The top 10% of wealth holders in three Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden and Denmark) hold between 65 and 69 per cent of those nations' wealth."
"Almost 90 percent of capital income made in the country during that period went to the 10 percent of the population with the highest income."

The wealthy still live so in Sweden. It also simply provides low public corruption and low poverty rates with good safety nets.
 
Last edited:

Wagmore

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
12,091
HRC put herself in the Catch-22 situation of either dumping all her personal emails into the public with great GOP joy about what juicy personal stuff could be found in them (don't think I'd be ready stomach-wise for any Bill and HRC nude selfies and 'relationship issues' though) or having the GOP troll her with worst case scenarios regarding the deleted material. She also mishandled her responses to it.

Here's the thing though...

First, in fairness most people do that for convenience even though we shouldn't. I keep business and personal emails but sometimes in the hustle of doing things people send personal things to my business emails or I fire one off from my phone, etc, and I've long noticed pretty much everyone else does that too. Trump and his Admin figures have been caught so many times using nonsecure and nongovernment communications including suspicious scrubbings and encryptions that I've simply no time anymore for the faux outrage over her emails.

Second, more importantly, the GOP and others long knew she used her own personal server. Tens of thousands of her emails using her '@billandhillclinton.com' email or whatever it was were already on the government servers through email exchanges as they related to government business. The supposed 'surprise' was merely tactical political theatre.

That said, it worked effectively as a troll device during her election, especially with the media with its efforts to look impartial. I take it for what it was...the arts of political combat, not a sincere 'outrage'.

But Comey? Nah. If he wanted to ingratiate himself with her, he could have done things like Barr does for Trump. Rather, not only did he trash her earlier, he fired off the last minute 'Comey letter' fatally damaged her. Reportedly she even ranted and raved inside her house for a couple weeks after the election where Comey was the main effigy character. "With friends like that, who needs enemies" if he was trying to get on her good side.
Yeah, but with respect, you're not Secretatary of State. Comey thrashed her but did not indict. He had to cover his butt when he got news the highly valuable(to foreign powers) emails were discovered on paedo Wiener's laptop. Investigation was a joke and Comeys is responsible, Agent Strzok, interview but not under oath. Comey took the brunt of backlash for his incompetence but he was just the willing fall-guy to protect and put clear blue between him and his controllers in the DOJ, Loretta Lynch and Obozo. All coming out now....drip drip ....tick tock .
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,814
Yeah, but with respect, you're not Secretatary of State. Comey thrashed her but did not indict. He had to cover his butt when he got news the highly valuable(to foreign powers) emails were discovered on paedo Wiener's laptop. Investigation was a joke and Comeys is responsible, Agent Strzok, interview but not under oath. Comey took the brunt of backlash for his incompetence but he was just the willing fall-guy to protect and put clear blue between him and his controllers in the DOJ, Loretta Lynch and Obozo. All coming out now....drip drip ....tick tock .
As Rosenstein aptly put it, Comey broke all sorts of DOJ practices doing what he did as explained that hurt her. If he really wanted to ingratiate himself with her, he simply would have said "no charges warranted and case closed". As for paedo Weiner's laptop that resulted in the last minute 'Comey letter', he could have said nothing until after the election and it turned out to be nothing anyway. In fact, that's what he was supposed to do under DOJ policies and the same with his initial conclusion that no charges were warranted.

Yeah, Trump & Co would have howled, but what would he care if he had the fix in for her? It's not like they were on HRC's side anyway. To me, it just doesn't make sense and gets too clever by half and revises the history of Comey to further the anti-FBI counterattack.
 

Wagmore

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
12,091
As Rosenstein aptly put it, Comey broke all sorts of DOJ practices doing what he did as explained that hurt her. If he really wanted to ingratiate himself with her, he simply would have said "no charges warranted and case closed". As for paedo Weiner's laptop that resulted in the last minute 'Comey letter', he could have said nothing until after the election and it turned out to be nothing anyway. In fact, that's what he was supposed to do under DOJ policies and the same with his initial conclusion that no charges were warranted.

Yeah, Trump & Co would have howled, but what would he care if he had the fix in for her? It's not like they were on HRC's side anyway. To me, it just doesn't make sense and gets too clever by half and revises the history of Comey to further the anti-FBI counterattack.
The fix worked. She wasn't indicted and nobody thought Trump would win. You do remember the utube compilations of Clintonistas systematically losing their minds as election night progressed?
 

Wagmore

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
12,091
As Rosenstein aptly put it, Comey broke all sorts of DOJ practices doing what he did as explained that hurt her. If he really wanted to ingratiate himself with her, he simply would have said "no charges warranted and case closed". As for paedo Weiner's laptop that resulted in the last minute 'Comey letter', he could have said nothing until after the election and it turned out to be nothing anyway. In fact, that's what he was supposed to do under DOJ policies and the same with his initial conclusion that no charges were warranted.

Yeah, Trump & Co would have howled, but what would he care if he had the fix in for her? It's not like they were on HRC's side anyway. To me, it just doesn't make sense and gets too clever by half and revises the history of Comey to further the anti-FBI counterattack.
No, given all the hype and howl, a "no charges warranted, case closed" from Comey would have precipitated a backlash that would have threatened Clinton. It was a spin job that makes perfect sense given all that is spilling out about Comey's part in dodgy FISA applications, intentional leaking etc. You're going to have to face these realities sooner or later. Comey was probably well intentioned in his own head but he has been exposed as a partisan shill that had become drunk on his ow self righteousness
 

ruman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
2,851
"The top 10% of wealth holders in three Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden and Denmark) hold between 65 and 69 per cent of those nations' wealth."
"Almost 90 percent of capital income made in the country during that period went to the 10 percent of the population with the highest income."

The wealthy still live so in Sweden. It also simply provides low public corruption and low poverty rates with good safety nets.
And whats your point, do u want the US to be more like the Nordic countries?
Do US citizens have any say in this?

The US is not interested in that sort of society. It is built on a winner take all approach. This means the rewards are amplified for the successful and life is difficult for the poor. You or I may not agree with that but it is reality.

Its rather arrogant of you to think you can simply apply the system of one country on another against the wishes of the citizens of that country.

The US is not like Swedan because its citizens dont want it to be.
 

ruman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
2,851
It is like talking to Rip Van Winkle, but Donald Goldman Sachs Trump signed off on the most Wall Street-friendly Corporate tax cut in history, of which 0 benefits went to the gullible rubes who voted for him. Joke's on you, I would say.

All the Democratic candidate needs to ask in 2020 is "Are you better off than you were in 2016 ?" Americans not blessed to be in the Trumpian corporate elite will be saying "No" to that.
I dont live in the US so i'm not sure why the "joke is on me" as you put it. Obviously my pension value has risen considerably over the course of the Trump presidency although given i'm a considerable distance off retirement its simply a paper gain

Anyway as previously pointed out US unemployment is at a 50 year low and markets at a record high so it seems things are going rather well. Do keep up the personal insults like a good chap i'm finding you frighfully amusing.

 
Last edited:

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,111
There is little doubt about the effect of the Comey letter.

The irony is that Comey felt free to send it because he was sure Clinton would win. He dreaded becoming a target for Congressional Republicans when it came out after the election that the investigation into Clinton had been re-opened.

Similarly, over-confidence in Clinton's win lulled a lot of Democrats into staying home or voting for 3rd parties. Trump added ~2 million Republican voters to Romney's 2012 total - about the average that could be expected from population growth. Clinton only added 0.6 million votes to Obama's 2012 total - but still won the popular vote by the largest amount ever. An even bigger popular vote win would have converted into an Electoral College win.


I am not sure this bit is accurate. To the best of my knowledge, Hillary got a lower raw vote that Obama, (marginally) in 2012 and substantially less than Obama's total in 2008, which to this day is the high watermark of vote getters.

Her percentage of the vote was also less than both Kerry and Gore.

In 2016, Stein and Johnson literally tripled their 2012 total votes, Trump got 2 million more than Romney did but Hillary lowered the Democratic vote.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
46,031
I am not sure this bit is accurate. To the best of my knowledge, Hillary got a lower raw vote that Obama, (marginally) in 2012 and substantially less than Obama's total in 2008, which to this day is the high watermark of vote getters.

Her percentage of the vote was also less than both Kerry and Gore.

In 2016, Stein and Johnson literally tripled their 2012 total votes, Trump got 2 million more than Romney did but Hillary lowered the Democratic vote.
You are right, actually.

Obama 2012: 65,915,798
Clinton 2016: 65,853,514

That makes it even more amazing that Clinton had a substantial popular vote win. In fact, neither candidate succeeded particularly well in their GOTV, but Clinton suffered the more.

The total number of votes went up from 129m to 136 million (approx), an increase of 5.4%. Clinton did not increase the Democrat vote, and Trump increased the Republican vote over 2012 by 3.3% (but still could not beat the Democratic vote). The bulk of the new votes went to the 3rd and 4th parties, which (as you point out) tripled their votes.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,814
And whats your point, do u want the US to be more like the Nordic countries?
Do US citizens have any say in this?

The US is not interested in that sort of society. It is built on a winner take all approach. This means the rewards are amplified for the successful and life is difficult for the poor. You or I may not agree with that but it is reality.

Its rather arrogant of you to think you can simply apply the system of one country on another against the wishes of the citizens of that country.

The US is not like Swedan because its citizens dont want it to be.
Insofar as 'arrogance', I'm entitled to a direct say given I also have US citizenship and currently reside in it, invest in it with businesses and pay taxes, offered it military service despite a Quaker background***, volunteer as a county voter services worker that does the crap work of actually performing and certifying elections, perform charity work in it, etc. I do much the same for and within in Ireland for which I've always maintained my citizenship and with family and business connections and other involvement.

I also covered the issue of whether or not US citizens desire basic safety nets. They do by a clear majority and I explained and linked you with evidence of the same.

What's arguably arrogant is your presumption that Americans--or anywhere else for that matter--as a general rule prefer sh!tty living without the basics of proper community, basic safety nets like decent schools and accessible health care, and working harder for less so Gordon Gekko gets another yacht to ski behind. If anything, you're making the old 'happy slaves' argument in the US or the 'content tenants' argument for pre-1916 Ireland for how things worked.

None of that is any argument against being rich....I very much like it being an entrepreneur and a 'man of means' myself. It mean anything to excess like laissez faire Robber Baron Social Darwinism is bad because it is.

***just for the record, I am not claiming I am a US military veteran. I wore the uniform whilst in an international students' programme whilst in a US university in a USAF ROTC programme for training officers upon graduation. I became ineligible whilst in the programme given a change in policy that required renunciation of my Irish citizenship (which I will always maintain) for officer status and also 'the peace dividend' cutbacks once the Cold War ended. I did, however, offer the US that civic duty as I would for Ireland if called upon to do so.
 
Last edited:

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,814
No, given all the hype and howl, a "no charges warranted, case closed" from Comey would have precipitated a backlash that would have threatened Clinton. It was a spin job that makes perfect sense given all that is spilling out about Comey's part in dodgy FISA applications, intentional leaking etc. You're going to have to face these realities sooner or later. Comey was probably well intentioned in his own head but he has been exposed as a partisan shill that had become drunk on his ow self righteousness
IMO as explained Comey was always drunk on his own self-righteousness. We'll have to differ on the rest for now.

To note though, I'll never have an issue facing any reality so long as it is reality. I've no issue with anything credibly amiss being exposed that was done to Team Trump anymore than I've decried the wrongdoings I've concluded or suspected that Team Trump has done. What's fact is fact, and what's right is right.

Heck, sometimes facts can even bear out that both sides have things to answer, e.g., drug pusher gets busted with a bad search warrant where it becomes clear the cops fouled the ball with the warrant but the target is shown to be a doper via the illegally seized and judicially suppressed evidence rather than an innocent person, etc. And if you really want to see lots of mutual sh!t shows, spend a day watching so-called 'family court' cases.
 
Last edited:

ruman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
2,851
Insofar as 'arrogance', I'm entitled to a direct say given I also have US citizenship and currently reside in it, invest in it with businesses and pay taxes, offered it military service despite a Quaker background***, volunteer as a county voter services worker that does the crap work of actually performing and certifying elections, perform charity work in it, etc. I do much the same for and within in Ireland for which I've always maintained my citizenship and with family and business connections and other involvement.

I also covered the issue of whether or not US citizens desire basic safety nets. They do by a clear majority and I explained and linked you with evidence of the same.

What's arguably arrogant is your presumption that Americans--or anywhere else for that matter--as a general rule prefer sh!tty living without the basics of proper community, basic safety nets like decent schools and accessible health care, and working harder for less so Gordon Gekko gets another yacht to ski behind. If anything, you're making the old 'happy slaves' argument in the US or the 'content tenants' argument for pre-1916 Ireland for how things worked.

None of that is any argument against being rich....I very much like it being an entrepreneur and a 'man of means' myself. It mean anything to excess like laissez faire Robber Baron Social Darwinism is bad because it is.

***just for the record, I am not claiming I am a US military veteran. I wore the uniform whilst in an international students' programme whilst in a US university in a USAF ROTC programme for training officers upon graduation. I became ineligible whilst in the programme given a change in policy that required renunciation of my Irish citizenship (which I will always maintain) for officer status and also 'the peace dividend' cutbacks once the Cold War ended. I did, however, offer the US that civic duty as I would for Ireland if called upon to do so.
Obviously you are entitled to your opinion and given you claim you have a vote that opinion will actually matter.

Clearly however your opinion is not shared by enough Americans to matter. If it was then America would be Swedan now wouldnt it!

I'm not " arguing" about anything simply pointing out reality. You seem to think your opinion is the only one that matters and appear to have difficulty accepting others might not share your views. None of which implies you arent entitled to your opinion, you are, but so are others.
 
Last edited:

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,371
If America had 85% of its eligible voters turn up for elections as Sweden does, you would be surprised at how much closer a majority of Americans are to many of the things OSB outlines.
Cheaper healthcare, cheaper education (especially college), more equitable taxation system, a basic minimum livable wage...
You know, "crazed commie" stuff like that

But they don't, they have pitiful turnouts of low 50s and Trump/GOP are going to do everything they can, fair and foul try to drive that lower
 

ruman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
2,851
If America had 85% of its eligible voters turn up for elections as Sweden does, you would be surprised at how much closer a majority of Americans are to many of the things OSB outlines.
Cheaper healthcare, cheaper education (especially college), more equitable taxation system, a basic minimum livable wage...
You know, "crazed commie" stuff like that

But they don't, they have pitiful turnouts of low 50s and Trump/GOP are going to do everything they can, fair and foul try to drive that lower
Sounds like wild speculation on your part. What we can say with certainty is there was an election in 2016 as a result of which Trump is president.

Obviously if everyone was forced to vote democrat Hillary would be President , but they arent.

If my aunt had balls Jack.......
 

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,371
Sounds like wild speculation on your part. What we can say with certainty is there was an election in 2016 as a result of which Trump is president.

Obviously if everyone was forced to vote democrat Hillary would be President , but they arent.

If my aunt had balls Jack.......
Maybe she does
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
30,723
Sounds like wild speculation on your part. What we can say with certainty is there was an election in 2016 as a result of which Trump is president.

Obviously if everyone was forced to vote democrat Hillary would be President , but they arent.
False analogy there - it's not about making people vote the way you want : people aren't voting in the States, and that means their election results are not necessarily representative of public opinion.

Especially since many of those who aren't voting are from an ethnic group who were actively prevented from voting in the past, and there are indications that many current "security" measures have the effect of preventing this same ethnic group from voting.

We can't say if the North Koreans all support Kim or not, because they can't vote. If half the country never votes, there's a somewhat similar problem.
 

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top