Colin Powell and Hillary Clinton....I lost all respect for Colin Powell.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: JinMI
Just out of curiosity, how many career Republicans did Trump have to beat to get the vote of the people?

15, which is also how he won. He never would have made it through a small field. Larger fields mean you need a smaller base to vote for you. What Trump did was the Huckabee strategy except he recruited racists and bigots rather than evangelicals.

Seriously? They all had a chance with smaller bases.

WTF kind of logic is that?

So you are still saying there are more racist's and bigots than any other demo? lol, nice move!

Now with hillary and bernie, what do you have?

Bernie had the young and social plus the commies and boomer hippies.

What does that leave hillary? Old cat ladies, BLM and the press whackos.

lolol!!

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Annee

We do know.

Just like we know Clinton sent and received classified material via unsecured email.

Even as a civilian she had classified email on her server.

And probably others did too.

But, hey! They're not being "swift boated".

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Annee

We do know.

Just like we know Clinton sent and received classified material via unsecured email.

Even as a civilian she had classified email on her server.

And probably others did too.

But, hey! They're not being "swift boated".

Your defense is "others did it too......probably"?

originally posted by: Annee
And probably others did too.

You are absolutely correct.

Cheryl Mills
Huma Abedin
Brian Pagliano

etc...................

a reply to: RickinVa

I lost all respect for Colin Powell when he refused to come clean about all the damn lies he told at the UN that day.

I gave him a few years to come clean and be relatively honest, but no joy.

a reply to: Salander

This might sound weird but Powell did not lie at the UN. The Bush administration lied at the UN. It's like Hillarys stance on the TPP issue. As Secstate she is required to support it and sell it, even if she does not support it. She was representing the position of the Obama administration.

As much as I dislike Clinton the fact I am using her as an example should drive that point home.

To put it another way -
The idiot fast food workers who refuse to serve police dont understand why they are being fired for that. While they are at work their personal opinion takes a back seat to the position of the company they work for.


Probably a topic for another thread but wikileaks vindicated the Bush administration on the wmd issue.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I understand your point, and agree up to a point. Yes, Powell fell on his sword for the C in C like a good soldier.

The trouble was that unless he's really really stupid, and I don't think he was or is, he knew he was deceiving the country and the world. He knew he was enabling fraud against the American people, and one way or another, arguably committing treason.

That's why I gave him a number of years to set the record straight. He has not, and IMO, the fraud is complete.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

15 challengers means you need 7% of the vote to win, Trump got around 33%.

2 challengers means you need 50% of the vote to win.

Trump never would have gotten through a 2 person field, as the number of candidates shrunk his number of supporters didn't increase.

originally posted by: RickinVa
Do other people do it? Sure I assume they do. But now I know for sure that Powell is just as bad as any other politician.

It's standard procedure, government officials don't like being on the record so they'll circumvent it wherever possible. Welcome to human nature.

originally posted by: Salander
I understand your point, and agree up to a point. Yes, Powell fell on his sword for the C in C like a good soldier.

The trouble was that unless he's really really stupid, and I don't think he was or is, he knew he was deceiving the country and the world. He knew he was enabling fraud against the American people, and one way or another, arguably committing treason.

That's why I gave him a number of years to set the record straight. He has not, and IMO, the fraud is complete.

Fair enough...

I would point out though that unless information was declassified Powell still would not be allowed to disclose that info, even years / decades later.

Don't get me wrong I am not trying to defend him at all costs. Just pointing out some of the goofier complexities that factor into these situations. The other point I would add is his military career. I have never known Powell to act in an unprofessional manner, especially when it comes to state secrets.

I would imagine the awkwardness of the nations top general and then top diplomat becoming a whistle blower.

You know it is kind of funny.

Like I stated, I respected General Powell and thought he would make a great president.

All that got destroyed in 1 single email.

1 single email where he advised someone on how to skirt the FOIA laws is more than I need to know that Colin Powell would never be worthy of my vote.


How many damning emails does it take for a Hillary supporter to realize she is not worthy of their vote? Must be a whole crap load by now and they will still vote for her.

a reply to: RickinVa

More, because most Hillary supporters don't see it as an issue. I have to admit, I'm not a Hillary supporter (I'm undecided, which means I might vote for her, but probably not) and I don't care about the email issue.

I fully understand that she broke the law, and I fully understand that this is indicative of us having a two tier justice system.

None of that matters to me, because I recognize the somewhat unpleasant truth that functioning governments sometimes have to work outside the laws, and that people are going to do what they can to be off record. What Hillary did is what I fully expect every high ranking member in our government to be doing, because that's how things get done.

It's not right, and it's not fair, but it would be wrong to start prosecuting members of previous administrations over doing what is effectively, business as usual.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: RickinVa

More, because most Hillary supporters don't see it as an issue. I have to admit, I'm not a Hillary supporter (I'm undecided, which means I might vote for her, but probably not) and I don't care about the email issue.

I fully understand that she broke the law, and I fully understand that this is indicative of us having a two tier justice system.

None of that matters to me, because I recognize the somewhat unpleasant truth that functioning governments sometimes have to work outside the laws, and that people are going to do what they can to be off record. What Hillary did is what I fully expect every high ranking member in our government to be doing, because that's how things get done.

It's not right, and it's not fair, but it would be wrong to start prosecuting members of previous administrations over doing what is effectively, business as usual.

All I can say is, I am gobsmacked by this kind of cavalier attitude.

originally posted by: Aazadan

None of that matters to me, because I recognize the somewhat unpleasant truth that functioning governments sometimes have to work outside the laws, and that people are going to do what they can to be off record. What Hillary did is what I fully expect every high ranking member in our government to be doing, because that's how things get done.

YES!

Are you and I the only one who "sees" this?

Picking anything specific out of context of the entire event/situation that was going on - - - is dangerous IMO.

"WE" - - as in general public - - have not a clue of the inter workings of top level politics - - - which in this day and age is Global.

Idealism is a nice word - - not much else - - it is not reality.

I met Mr. Powell for like 2 minutes circa 1987

originally posted by: Aazadan
None of that matters to me, because I recognize the somewhat unpleasant truth that functioning governments sometimes have to work outside the laws, ...

"Inter arma enim silent leges" is the phrase you are looking for.


The phrase was no more appropriate when Cicero wrote it than it is today.

a reply to: Aazadan

It seems you have slipped down the slippery slope, to the bottom.

If you are willing to accept without complaint the government operating outside the law, then you happily accept lawlessness in government.

Now I understand that you and I can do nothing at all about lawless government, but at least I can bitch and complain about it instead of accepting it without complaint.

It is true that we have the government we deserve, government that violates its constitutional boundaries as it pleases. Voting is an illusion and an exercise in futility.

a reply to: Annee

Some folks here are still smarting over the public embarrassment they created for themselves by claiming, for months, that their "insider information" GUARANTEED that Clinton would be recommended for indictment by the FBI.

Public shame has apparently caused some to take leave of their rational faculties.

/shrug

a reply to: RickinVa

To echo what another poster explained, Powell is merely saying that if Clinton chose to use a personal device for public business, that would mean her personal business would become public record.

Too bad Clinton didn't listen, eh?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Annee

We do know.

Just like we know Clinton sent and received classified material via unsecured email.

Even as a civilian she had classified email on her server.

And probably others did too.

But, hey! They're not being "swift boated".

Because the other "civilians" are in jail.