***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[ar guy]

Ok, I know this is old news but I just have to ask someone who is pulling for Hillary or really a non conservative. Why isn't her email/private server scandal a bigger deal? I have a lowly secret clearance and if I did exactly the same thing she did I'd have my clearance pulled and very likely my military career would be over. Yet with her it just seems like no big deal. No one really cares and I'm honestly baffled by lack of outrage and care from most people. Can someone explain this to me, please. 

 

[rexanglorum]

Ok, I know this is old news but I just have to ask someone who is pulling for Hillary or really a non conservative. Why isn't her email/private server scandal a bigger deal? I have a lowly secret clearance and if I did exactly the same thing she did I'd have my clearance pulled and very likely my military career would be over. Yet with her it just seems like no big deal. No one really cares and I'm honestly baffled by lack of outrage and care from most people. Can someone explain this to me, please. 

There are two answers to your question.

The first answer is that the Benghazi and email investigations are just so nakedly political. The committee has formed and reformed for the sole purpose of damaging Hillary Clinton politically. There is zero interest on the part of Republicans when it comes to improving the security for American diplomats. George W. Bush and his administration never faced this kind of heat despite serial screw ups like 9/11, the Iraq War, Katrina and the 2008 Financial Crash.

The other answer is simply the fact that law, social norms, rules, consequences and that most beloved of elite buzz words, accountability, is for little people. We have become accustomed to elite failings thanks, in large part, to those aforementioned failures during the Bush years. Also, do not take my answer as partisan because Bush, Chaney and Rumsfeld are part of a broader pattern of a Western World where democracy is in decline, autocracy is on the rise and elites in politics, journalism and finance pay little or no price for malice and negligence while poor and marginalized people have their lives ruined or ended because of small mistakes or bad luck.

 

[ar guy]

 

Ok, I know this is old news but I just have to ask someone who is pulling for Hillary or really a non conservative. Why isn't her email/private server scandal a bigger deal? I have a lowly secret clearance and if I did exactly the same thing she did I'd have my clearance pulled and very likely my military career would be over. Yet with her it just seems like no big deal. No one really cares and I'm honestly baffled by lack of outrage and care from most people. Can someone explain this to me, please. 

There are two answers to your question.

The first answer is that the Benghazi and email investigations are just so nakedly political. The committee has formed and reformed for the sole purpose of damaging Hillary Clinton politically. There is zero interest on the part of Republicans when it comes to improving the security for American diplomats. George W. Bush and his administration never faced this kind of heat despite serial screw ups like 9/11, the Iraq War, Katrina and the 2008 Financial Crash.

The other answer is simply the fact that law, social norms, rules, consequences and that most beloved of elite buzz words, accountability, is for little people. We have become accustomed to elite failings thanks, in large part, to those aforementioned failures during the Bush years. Also, do not take my answer as partisan because Bush, Chaney and Rumsfeld are part of a broader pattern of a Western World where democracy is in decline, autocracy is on the rise and elites in politics, journalism and finance pay little or no price for malice and negligence while poor and marginalized people have their lives ruined or ended because of small mistakes or bad luck.

From the political side I understand what were you're coming from. I meant from her everyday supporters like we have here on NT. I do appreciate your response however. 

 

[duba169]

-How will economic sanctions be hard to be put back in place? Explain this to me.

-And you're really going to play the "big business" card, more hypocrisy. The GOP are the party of corporate interest, they don't even attempt to hide it, they are proud of it.

-Like lets not forget America and Iran weren't the only countries involved in this deal and that it will benefit the people of Iran greatly.

-And how is doing what Israel wants so important to American interest, btw?

-I brought up Israel because you know they were the major talking point for the right during the negotiations. But I also pointed out what hypocrites conservatives are being about this "outrage".

Yet you want to ignore that entire part, and somehow paint me as "obsessed" with Israel and that is somehow making me not see the truth.

Well I see it brah, I see conservatives being hypocrites.

-BTW, I got keep my doctor. Many didn't, I'll admit that it was wrong for Obama to over promise like that.

But that being your comeback to sending thousands of troops to die, and blowing 1.7 trillion on a pointless war is straight up hilarious.

The two are not even in the same ballpark famb

Every conversation with you ends up as a democrat vs republican pissing match. I say obama lied and you say "oh well the GOP lied about something bigger!". Pure defelction and I'm not a republican so i don't find myself veing a hypocrite.

Sanctions between all those countries were very hard to put together. It will be damn near impossible to do it again once the money flows. I shouldn't have to explain that. You won't snap your fingers and convince everyone to "snap back"

You think this was about helping the iranian people? All i've read so far is the gov't cracking down even more on dissidents and resisting any american influence whatsoever. This deal propped up the gov't and allows them to stay around longer. If obama cared about the people he would have shown support during the green revolution. This is about money and legacy not the people.

It comes down to this. Do you think it is in american interests fo iran to be a major power broker in the region and become a nuclear threshold state in the near future? If you don't see the problem then i would respect that. As opposed to talking about all this other stuff.

 

[crcballer55]

 

Ok, I know this is old news but I just have to ask someone who is pulling for Hillary or really a non conservative. Why isn't her email/private server scandal a bigger deal? I have a lowly secret clearance and if I did exactly the same thing she did I'd have my clearance pulled and very likely my military career would be over. Yet with her it just seems like no big deal. No one really cares and I'm honestly baffled by lack of outrage and care from most people. Can someone explain this to me, please. 

There are two answers to your question.

The first answer is that the Benghazi and email investigations are just so nakedly political. The committee has formed and reformed for the sole purpose of damaging Hillary Clinton politically. There is zero interest on the part of Republicans when it comes to improving the security for American diplomats. George W. Bush and his administration never faced this kind of heat despite serial screw ups like 9/11, the Iraq War, Katrina and the 2008 Financial Crash.

The other answer is simply the fact that law, social norms, rules, consequences and that most beloved of elite buzz words, accountability, is for little people. We have become accustomed to elite failings thanks, in large part, to those aforementioned failures during the Bush years. Also, do not take my answer as partisan because Bush, Chaney and Rumsfeld are part of a broader pattern of a Western World where democracy is in decline, autocracy is on the rise and elites in politics, journalism and finance pay little or no price for malice and negligence while poor and marginalized people have their lives ruined or ended because of small mistakes or bad luck.

Couldn't we also say the same about Watergate too? Congress wasn't trying to see how they could prevent another political break in but were trying to destroy Nixon instead.

To be fair though, we all know Hillary is guilty of contempt just like Lois Lerner was, but neither will do anything since the Justice Department has already acquitted Lerner and would do the same for Hillary

I agree on your second point too. We've gotten to a point where the little people pay and the big people just "resign". Actually... that's a direct play out of Clinton's playbook from Travel Gate in 1993.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/05/u...ore-of-travel-office-case.html?pagewanted=all

The more I see it, the more Hillary appears to employ the same tactics that Nixon did to try to intimidate people to do what he wanted only more so and more maliciously.

 

[slighted]

Let's be honest here: we're all peasants in politicians' minds.

The fact that we're arguing and pointing fingers at the "enemy liberals / conservatives" is ridiculous. This is exactly what they want you to do. They don't care about you; why should you care about them?

PS - Hillary / Bernie / Trump is not going to help you.

 

[duba169]

What i don't get is why the private emails are more played up than the server. The sever is where intense outrage should be. If that was cheney people would bw flipping out. As they should.

I think her supporters don't care because they think she can won and simply think she would be better than any republucam nominated so they give her a huge pass.

Speaking of hillary did anyone see this?

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/hillary-clinton-says-it-was-a-poor-choice-of-190030383.html

This type of newsspeak scares the hell out of me. She won't say "illegal immigrant" anymore. Like what? Who is that offending? People who didn't come to the country legally?

Calling an illegal immigrant an "undocumented worker". Next time someone robs a bank lets just call it an "unauthorized withdrawl"

 

[RustyShackleford]

-How will economic sanctions be hard to be put back in place? Explain this to me.

-And you're really going to play the "big business" card, more hypocrisy. The GOP are the party of corporate interest, they don't even attempt to hide it, they are proud of it.

-Like lets not forget America and Iran weren't the only countries involved in this deal and that it will benefit the people of Iran greatly.

-And how is doing what Israel wants so important to American interest, btw?

-I brought up Israel because you know they were the major talking point for the right during the negotiations. But I also pointed out what hypocrites conservatives are being about this "outrage".

Yet you want to ignore that entire part, and somehow paint me as "obsessed" with Israel and that is somehow making me not see the truth.

Well I see it brah, I see conservatives being hypocrites.

-BTW, I got keep my doctor. Many didn't, I'll admit that it was wrong for Obama to over promise like that.

But that being your comeback to sending thousands of troops to die, and blowing 1.7 trillion on a pointless war is straight up hilarious.

The two are not even in the same ballpark famb

Every conversation with you ends up as a democrat vs republican pissing match. I say obama lied and you say "oh well the GOP lied about something bigger!". Pure defelction and I'm not a republican so i don't find myself veing a hypocrite.

Sanctions between all those countries were very hard to put together. It will be damn near impossible to do it again once the money flows. I shouldn't have to explain that. You won't snap your fingers and convince everyone to "snap back"

You think this was about helping the iranian people? All i've read so far is the gov't cracking down even more on dissidents and resisting any american influence whatsoever. This deal propped up the gov't and allows them to stay around longer. If obama cared about the people he would have shown support during the green revolution. This is about money and legacy not the people.

It comes down to this. Do you think it is in american interests fo iran to be a major power broker in the region and become a nuclear threshold state in the near future? If you don't see the problem then i would respect that. As opposed to talking about all this other stuff.

You have a theory that the sanctions will be hard to put back in place, in practice that is false:

-First the amount of time it would take to build a nuclear weapon is much longer than the amount of time it takes for the major world powers to tank your economy.

-Second, look at what happened to with Russia, no one on either side even brought up, "OMG it is gonna be so hard for us to stop the flow of money into there". So stop acting like money is some sort to raging river that can be contained once we let it get back into Iran.

-Third, you don't think having investment from foriegn firms doesn't help the Iran economy and return their people. Again, their were other countries involved in this deal, not every dollar following into Iran is American. So you can get investment with the "American influence". So now I need to ignore day one Macro too.

-And ok, dismiss and the "pissing contest", even though you clapback with the ACA thing. My point about the hypocrisy with this is still valid. Where were you when the GOP was openly talking about breaking this agreement first chance they had? Did you post an article? Did you show this outrage that America could be violating this deal?

That why I said so what. Because we're guilty of nearly the same thing, so if there is not outrage for one, why should there be for another.

--------Before you tried to say that holding Israel to a higher standard than other nations is anti semitic.

Holding israel to a higher standard than any other country IS anti semetic. Liberals have a bigotry of low expectations when it comes to palestinans. They think that they have no role in their current situation.

So by your own logic, isn't holding Iran to a higher standard than every other country involved with the deal, especially America, Islamophobic? Hmmm

-I said so what because this is not a big deal in the general scheme of things, they violate, they get the same punishment regardless. I'm just not going to entertain a chicken lil routine regarding this information because of how hypocritical it is.

So can respect that or not, that's on you.

 

[rolaholic]

@ReutersPolitics:
U.S. senators call for 20,000 troops in Syria and Iraq http://www.reuters.com/article/2015...US20151129?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews

Thoughts?

 

[superblytrife]

People don't care about Benghazi because it's clearly a witch hunt.  Anyone with a lick of sense and objectivity, liberal or conservative, can see that.  There are Republicans STILL trying to use that against her, as if it'll be their golden goose to move her outta the paint.  

And like Rex said, it has nothing to do with the people that died or improving security.  It is SO painfully obvious that the only objective is to throw dirt on Hillary's name.  

I'm not saying that mistakes weren't made.  But folks on the right are going way too hard about the issue to where it makes you question their motives.  It's all political = more par for the course from our politicians = people tune it out.  

 

[RustyShackleford]

Let's be honest here: we're all peasants in politicians' minds.

The fact that we're arguing and pointing fingers at the "enemy liberals / conservatives" is ridiculous. This is exactly what they want you to do. They don't care about you; why should you care about them?

PS - Hillary / Bernie / Trump is not going to help you.

Huh?

Who here is asking for a politician to save them? But how runs the government is extremely important

But liberals and conservatives govern very different, the enact very different policies that have lasting effects on people's lives.

The policies they enact and the foundation for how industries industries organize, how society functions and what trajectory the next generation

The next president is especially important because the next one will probably have say over if the SCOTUS is going to be a left leaning or right leaning court for next generation. The Supreme Court in recent years has made gay marriage legal, upheld one of the biggest social programs in recent history, decided the 2000 election, and made corporations people.

Whether you disagree with the decision the made, everyone should be able to agree that who makes the decisions is important. And that's what we are discussing

Even though I disagree with conservative a lot, I see the importance of a healthy conservative movement within a country, and that they're a good ideas on the other side. if it just that I believe the GOP are the absolute worst representation of what a good conservative can be.

-I would wish that the entire population took politics seriously . Not seriously in supporting their favorite sports team, but seriously in looking at the policies governments support. Even if that meant I won't get my way most of the time.

At least I know the government won't answer to the people over special interest, and that we would be living in a democracy not a oligarchy.

-And I do believe some politicians care, maybe not for me personally of course, but has a nation as a whole. The thing is they only have to really answer to those who care the most politics. That's why special interest get their way so much, why senior citizens have them by the nuts, why the young get screwed, and the Tea Party can flourish.

Because like Sanders had been trying to tell people, things only get better when everyone cares. Not about a politician personally, but about the political process in general, and the laws they pass.

-I can help every struggling single mom, every black kid being steamrolled, every immigrant coming here to have better chance at life, every teenage mom that doesn't want one mistake to ruin her life, every kid that can't afford college, or every poor person not knowing where their next meal is coming from, allies oversea needing protection.....it could go on for hours

I try to do my part through donating and volunteering, I see the importance of private enterprise plays, but I know I ain't Superman, and that profits and altruism don't align most of the time. However I also know that the one thing that can help (or hurt) those people the most are government policies.

So I care about those, and as a result I care about all the nonsense that comes with it.

And while I disagree with folk like Crc, and DubA on a lot, I respect that they care too.

Not caring is just sticking your head in the sand and hoping while your *** is in the air, it doesn't get ******.

Keep you head up brah and protect dem cheeks, and the cheek of the people you care about famb

 

[RustyShackleford]

@ReutersPolitics:
U.S. senators call for 20,000 troops in Syria and Iraq http://www.reuters.com/article/2015...US20151129?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews

Thoughts?

We just need to let McCain roam the Middle East with da yoppa, so he can hand out fades at his leisure.

Famb say feindin for war, and always wanna send troops somewhere

Like relax B

 

[rolaholic]

@ReutersPolitics:
U.S. senators call for 20,000 troops in Syria and Iraq http://www.reuters.com/article/2015...US20151129?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews

Thoughts?

We just need to let McCain roam the Middle East with da yoppa, so he can hand out fades at his leisure.

Famb say feindin for war, and always wanna send troops somewhere

Like relax B

Son has been itching to get in on the action so hard he was actually on the ground talking with rebels . Send him and his main man Graham over there

 

[duba169]

You have a theory that the sanctions will be hard to put back in place, in practice that is false:

-First the amount of time it would take to build a nuclear weapon is much longer than the amount of time it takes for the major world powers to tank your economy.

-Second, look at what happened to with Russia, no one on either side even brought up, "OMG it is gonna be so hard for us to stop the flow of money into there". So stop acting like money is some sort to raging river that can be contained once we let it get back into Iran.

-Third, you don't think having investment from foriegn firms doesn't help the Iran economy and return their people. Again, their were other countries involved in this deal, not every dollar following into Iran is American. So you can get investment with the "American influence". So now I need to ignore day one Macro too.

-And ok, dismiss and the "pissing contest", even though you clapback with the ACA thing. My point about the hypocrisy with this is still valid. Where were you when the GOP was openly talking about breaking this agreement first chance they had? Did you post an article? Did you show this outrage that America could be violating this deal?

That why I said so what. Because we're guilty of nearly the same thing, so if there is not outrage for one, why should there be for another.

--------Before you tried to say that holding Israel to a higher standard than other nations is anti semitic.
So by your own logic, isn't holding Iran to a higher standard than every other country involved with the deal, especially America, Islamophobic? Hmmm

-I said so what because this is not a big deal in the general scheme of things, they violate, they get the same punishment regardless. I'm just not going to entertain a chicken lil routine regarding this information because of how hypocritical it is.

So can respect that or not, that's on you.

There are 50 muslim majority countries in the world and you want to talk about islamaphobia? I don't see the world holding iran to a higher standard. I'm not sure how we would treat russia if putin started chanting "death to amerca" the next few years. Maybe israel should kidnap a reporter and hold a mock trial.

Iran executes homosexuals and we brush it off. What do you think the reaction would be if israel was hanging gays?

We treat iran the way we do because of their actions and our own strategic interests not because they are muslim.

Iran is literally already threatening to kill the "deal" and making demands.

https://www.rt.com/news/323888-iran-nuclear-deal-pmd-case/

 

[therealrell]

Islamophobia. So are the Islamic countries that want no parts of Syrians within their borders islamophobes?

 

[RustyShackleford]

You have a theory that the sanctions will be hard to put back in place, in practice that is false:

-First the amount of time it would take to build a nuclear weapon is much longer than the amount of time it takes for the major world powers to tank your economy.

-Second, look at what happened to with Russia, no one on either side even brought up, "OMG it is gonna be so hard for us to stop the flow of money into there". So stop acting like money is some sort to raging river that can be contained once we let it get back into Iran.

-Third, you don't think having investment from foriegn firms doesn't help the Iran economy and return their people. Again, their were other countries involved in this deal, not every dollar following into Iran is American. So you can get investment with the "American influence". So now I need to ignore day one Macro too.

-And ok, dismiss and the "pissing contest", even though you clapback with the ACA thing. My point about the hypocrisy with this is still valid. Where were you when the GOP was openly talking about breaking this agreement first chance they had? Did you post an article? Did you show this outrage that America could be violating this deal?

That why I said so what. Because we're guilty of nearly the same thing, so if there is not outrage for one, why should there be for another.

--------Before you tried to say that holding Israel to a higher standard than other nations is anti semitic.
So by your own logic, isn't holding Iran to a higher standard than every other country involved with the deal, especially America, Islamophobic? Hmmm

-I said so what because this is not a big deal in the general scheme of things, they violate, they get the same punishment regardless. I'm just not going to entertain a chicken lil routine regarding this information because of how hypocritical it is.

So can respect that or not, that's on you.

There are 50 muslim majority countries in the world and you want to talk about islamaphobia? I don't see the world holding iran to a higher standard. I'm not sure how we would treat russia if putin started chanting "death to amerca" the next few years. Maybe israel should kidnap a reporter and hold a mock trial.

Iran executes homosexuals and we brush it off. What do you think the reaction would be if israel was hanging gays?

We treat iran the way we do because of their actions and our own strategic interests not because they are muslim.

Iran is literally already threatening to kill the "deal" and making demands.

https://www.rt.com/news/323888-iran-nuclear-deal-pmd-case/

This is a complete deflection on your part.

Now you want me to follow down this rabbit hole only to avoid the fact I pointed out how hypocritical your "outrage" about this is one specific issue.

I didn't call anything you said Islmaphobic. You you don't know why you're flying off the handle. I said by your logic, and in the previous exchange, I said your logic was kinda ridiculous. Did I not?

I used the nonsense you posted before about Israel and anti semitism against you to show even more hypocrisy once again about this issue on your part.

Staying on topic, the same thing you were pissed off Iran about doing, America has been doing as well and you seemed to have NO problem with it.

You want to say America (specifically conservatives) is much better in many other ways, welp I agree, but not on what started is. Is it?

Iran government is signaling they may not be trustworthy, and so is America's.

So excuse me if I don't share you outrage over a lil signature. Lol

 

[Nike Jordan]

Sahil Kapur ‏@sahilkapur 52m52 minutes ago
Spoke to two Real Iowa Voters at a diner. One's a Dem who says she'd vote GOP over Hillary. Other likes “the colored gentleman—the doctor."

 

[duba169]

I don't think i'm being hypocritical. I think obama and kerry have done everything possible to play ball with the ayotollah. Random GOP members weren't part of the negotiations and no vote was held. I think iran has been more confrontational and shrewd since the deal was completed. Or not. As it isn't signed

I don't think iran is really being held to the same standard let alone higher standards than the other countires involved. So we just disagree there.

Maybe i miscommunicated what i meant with the israel comment. I see it like this. If you are all gung ho about BDS israel but don't say a word when it comes to other products from some of these muslim majority countries with a terrible human rights record. Or Chinese products for that matter. If you single out israel for a "disproportionate response" while cheering on france or russia it's a double standard.

The UN human rights council officially condemed israel more than all the other countries in the world COMBINED


http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...emns-israel-more-than-rest-of-world-combined/

The palestians are literally the only refugees in history where refugee status is passed down. It's hereditary. The only people in history who get that treatment. Clear double standard. So stuff like that is what i mean



It isn't just a signature though i already showed you they are balking at the issue of past work. Plus according to the deal if the sanctions are snaped back, iran can just walk away at that point so i don't know how good of a deterrent that really is. Especially if it happens 3 or 5 years into the deal.

We'll see how it all goes. It's an interesting matter to watch. Sometimes i think pakistan might pose a greater short term threat, but tbey hate india much more than the US lol



I enjoy the back and forth. I think we keep it generally civil.

 

[crcballer55]

[h1]Emails: CNN Reporter Coordinated With Hillary Aide To Smear Rand Paul During 2013 Benghazi Hearing[/h1]
A CNN reporter who was recently suspended for two weeks for violating the network’s editorial guidelines showed up in a new trove of State Department emails released on Tuesday in which she appears to have coordinated social media posts with a top Hillary Clinton State Department aide during the former secretary of state’s Jan. 23, 2013 Senate testimony about the Benghazi attacks.

The emails, which were released to the website Gawker, show that Elise Labott, a foreign affairs reporter at CNN, took guidance from Clinton aide Philippe Reines by posting a tweet criticizing Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul for asking Clinton tough questions during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks.

Labott also coordinated with Reines to post a favorable quote from Clinton’s testimony, which she gave just a week before she left office.

In the Reines emails, which are the subject of a Gawker lawsuit against the State Department, Labott appears to pick up on a previous conversation she was having with Reines during the Benghazi hearing, asking him: “are you sure rand paul wasn’t at any hearings?”

Five minutes after sending that email, Labott sent Reines another message sharing what she had tweeted about Paul.

Hours later, Labott and Reines were at it again.

“She was great. well done. I hope you are going to have a big drink tonight,” Labott wrote to Reines, complimenting Clinton’s performance.

Reines followed up that compliment by telling Labott that he had “suggested a good Tweet.”

Labott said that she had not received an email concerning another tweet. Reines wrote back “Pin,” an apparent reference to a private messaging system.

Labott wrote back “will get back to you.” Eleven minutes later she sent an email reading, “done.”

According to free-market advocate Phil Kerpen, who scoured through the emails on Tuesday, Labott sent the following message at Reines’ request:

ARB is a reference to the Accountability Review Board that Clinton appointed to investigate the Benghazi attacks.

The release of the emails caps a rough month for Labott. On Thursday, she posted a biased tweet decrying the House’s passage of a bill that would halt the program allowing Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the U.S. until federal agencies can ensure that they don’t pose a national security risk. CNN suspended Labott the next day for violating its editorial guidelines.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Hillary Clinton is really your new Obamacare

 

[$tatus $ymbol]

Is conspiring to smear rand paul of ALL people really the biggest issue at goddamn hand here? Jesus Christ this country I swear

 

[RustyShackleford]

Has soon as Crc reads even remotely bad regarding the Clintons, famb probably sprints to his pc to post it on here like......

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

"SEE, SEE, SEE..."

 

[slighted]

Rand Paul is a non-issue.

No idea why you guys even entertain news. Hillary's not gonna take the L. I'm invested in her win.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I wonder what the GOP front runner been up too. Hmmm.....

What's that you say, he turned up his bigotry to another notch, and has been getting rewarded for it. No way!!. I've been told that's not how conservative roll

But lets discuss an aide trying to convince a random reporter to slander an non factor politician on social media, as some sort of smoking gun. Yes, lets

 

[crcballer55]