B-Man
-
Posts
69,615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by B-Man
-
-
Kurtz: Liberal pundits experiencing Hillary buyer’s remorse.
"I know what you mean"How we now know that Hillary Clinton will not be prosecuted for anything
FTA:
This was a point made this week by Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post. Traditionally, Presidents have bent over backward to at least lend the patina of non-involvement in such an election, allowing the voters to make their own choice, but not so in this case.
But the bigger point is, why would President Obama tell his party to unite around a candidate at serious risk of criminal indictment — when all signs from the FBI would indicate a very good chance, if not a certainty, that indictment will be recommended based on the investigation? Of course, he would only do such a thing if he knew — was determined — that, no matter what, the chosen candidate would not be charged.
Hillary Clinton herself has appeared to think she’s untouchable — even declaring with certainty that she will not be indicted. “Oh, for goodness, it’s not going to happen. I’m not even answering that question,” Clinton said recently in Miami.
With the President being so clearly invested in electing a Democrat in general and Hillary Clinton in particular to continue his legacy, there’s simply no way he would risk putting his thumb on the scale for a candidate who might be essentially disqualified if she had to run the last stage of her campaign from a jail cell.
With all that in mind, it’s difficult to conclude anything other than a presumption that Obama knows that Clinton will face no such peril. But how could he know that if the investigation isn’t even finished yet?
More at the link:
-
-
I'm going to bump this since it is important
and it got buried on the past page while DR (cat) was playing with Gator (dead mouse)......
FTA:
Neither is the FBI the only powerful Federal agency that Hillary Clinton needs to worry about as she plots her path to the White House between scandals and leaks. For years, she has been on the bad side of the National Security Agency, America’s most important intelligence agency, as revealed by just-released State Department documents obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act. . . .
Now, over two months later, I can confirm that the contents of Sid Blumenthal’s June 8, 2011 email to Hillary Clinton, sent to her personal, unclassified account, were indeed based on highly sensitive NSA information. The Agency investigated this compromise and determined that Mr. Blumenthal’s highly detailed account of Sudanese goings-on, including the retelling of high-level conversations in that country, was indeed derived from NSA intelligence.
Specifically, this information was illegally lifted from four different NSA reports, all of them classified Top Secret / Special Intelligence. Worse, at least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program or SAP, several of which from CIA Ms. Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails.
Currently serving NSA officials have told me they have no doubt that Mr. Blumenthal’s information came from their reports. “It’s word-for-word, verbatim copying,” one of them explained. “In one case, an entire paragraph was lifted from an NSA report” that was classified Top Secret / Special Intelligence.
How Sid Blumenthal got his hands on this information is the key question, and there’s no firm answer yet.
Somebody should find out.
.
-
Why all the love for Hillary? Why her over Sanders or anyone on the left for that matter?
Instructions.
-
A step in the right direction.............
House passes resolution to defend Congress’s Article I Powers under the Constitution.
Constitution is clear: Congress writes laws, not unelected bureaucrats.
(WASHINGTON, DC) – On Thursday, Eighth District Congressman Larry Bucshon, M.D. voted to approve a resolution granting the Speaker of the House authority to file an amicus brief before the Supreme Court defending the Article I powers of Congress.
“The Constitution is crystal clear: the Legislative Branch writes laws and the Executive Branch faithfully executes them. Unfortunately, under President Obama the White House and unelected bureaucrats are essentially writing the laws the American people are governed by. The president is free to disagree with the actions of Congress. However, his disagreement does not grant him authority to circumvent the Legislative Branch and write laws, period.
“This resolution grants the Speaker authority to file a brief on behalf of the House before the Supreme Court defending and protecting the Article I power of Congress as the sole branch of government with legislative authority. In turn, it protects the American people from a growing unaccountable bureaucracy and restores the principle of self-governance. ”
H. Res. 639 authorizes the Speaker of the House to appear as amicus curiae on behalf of the House of Representatives in the matter of United States, et al. v. Texas, et al., No. 15–674.
YES.
all presidents have abused it to a point, don't bother letting that squirrel loose.
that is why it needs to be stopped.
-
-
-
THIS SEEMS IMPORTANT:
FTA:
Neither is the FBI the only powerful Federal agency that Hillary Clinton needs to worry about as she plots her path to the White House between scandals and leaks. For years, she has been on the bad side of the National Security Agency, America’s most important intelligence agency, as revealed by just-released State Department documents obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act. . . .
Now, over two months later, I can confirm that the contents of Sid Blumenthal’s June 8, 2011 email to Hillary Clinton, sent to her personal, unclassified account, were indeed based on highly sensitive NSA information. The Agency investigated this compromise and determined that Mr. Blumenthal’s highly detailed account of Sudanese goings-on, including the retelling of high-level conversations in that country, was indeed derived from NSA intelligence.
Specifically, this information was illegally lifted from four different NSA reports, all of them classified Top Secret / Special Intelligence. Worse, at least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program or SAP, several of which from CIA Ms. Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails.
Currently serving NSA officials have told me they have no doubt that Mr. Blumenthal’s information came from their reports. “It’s word-for-word, verbatim copying,” one of them explained. “In one case, an entire paragraph was lifted from an NSA report” that was classified Top Secret / Special Intelligence.
How Sid Blumenthal got his hands on this information is the key question, and there’s no firm answer yet.
Somebody should find out.
.
-
Also from Vox
EPA email: "I'm not so sure Flint is the community we want to go out on a limb for"
Vox
Pease note,the agency doesn't want to go out on a limb, NOT because the situation isn't serious, but due to concerns of the history of CORRUPTION OF DEMOCRAT city leaders.. -
Pluralities at Conventions: the Recordby Ramesh PonnuruParty nominees usually come to the convention with a majority of delegates. That could very happen for the Republicans this year.What if it doesn’t? In five of the last seven cases in which a candidate came to a party convention having earned a plurality of delegates, he didn’t win the nomination. Usually if the front-runner is unable to clinch a majority, it’s a sign of entrenched opposition limiting the potential of the candidacy.Candidates who came to their conventions with a plurality won the Republican nominations in 1976 and 1948. But the candidate who started with more delegates than anyone else did not win the 1952 Democratic, 1940 Republican, 1924 Democratic, 1920 Republican, or 1920 Democratic nominations. In those instances the nominations ultimately went to the candidate who came in third, third, seventh, sixth, and third, respectively, on their conventions’ first ballots.Also worth noting: In only one of the seven cases in which nobody had a majority of the delegates at the start of the convention did the party go on to win in November. The Republicans won in 1920–but they were up against a Democratic party in which no candidate came to the convention with a majority of delegates, either.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/cornerBut in those cases they were not running against an insider with high negative ratings like Hillary -
The EPA's Flint Abdication - WSJ : The agency tries to rewrite its history in the lead-water debacle.www.wsj.com/.
Michael Moore rails against Democrats for Flint water crisis ...www.washingtontimes.com/ -
It's called SATIRE. Look it up.
I'm well aware Tom.
Commentary on media hypocrisy can refer to all types of Media.
This isn't your father's Onion
LOL........probably the silliest sentence I've typed in a while.
.
One side:
NRO's Bench Memos: History of No Senate Hearing for Nominees http://bit.ly/1Z6cdQU
and the other:
Think again, this time after actually looking at the text and history of the #Constitution https://newrepublic.com/article/131700/republicans-block-obamas-supreme-court-pick-violating-constitution …
-
THE ONION RUNS PHOTOSHOP OF A BLOOD-SPLATTERED MITCH McCONNELL HOLDING ALOFT MERRICK GARLAND’S SEVERED HEAD, while standing on the steps of the Senate.
So just to confirm, Sarah Palin’s printer-registration marks clip art is the end of the world, but The Onion running an image of the Senate Majority Leader holding up the severed head of the president’s Supreme Court nominee? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
Yet another reminder that as Andrew McCarthy noted earlier this month, “Trump Is the Effect, Not the Cause — A sick society breeds gutter politics.” And as Jonah Goldberg wrote in August of 2011, after the left’s self-imposed new civility timeout had ended and they were back to referring to the Tea Party as suicide vest-wearing members the “Hezbollah faction” of the GOP, “to hell with you people.”
Here’s the link to the Onion, which I was tempted to withhold, given that Paul Krugman and three quarters of the left would have melted down if such an image came from the right. It’s also screencapped here, in case it’s deleted.
Related: From last month, Ace on “What The Onion Looks Like Under the Ownership of a Hillary Backer
Ed Driscoll: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/229377/
-
Black Lives Matter co-founder Marissa Jenae Johnson said the phrase “all lives matter” is a “new racial slur,” in a recent interview with Fox News national correspondent John Roberts.
“White Americans have created the conditions that require a phrase like ‘Black Likes Matter,’” said the 24-year-old Seattle-based activist. “Do you know how horrific it is to grow up as a child in a world that so hates you? While you’re literally being gunned down in the street, while you’re being rounded up and mass incarcerated and forced into prison slavery.”
“Black Lives Matter is not a strong enough statement for me,” Johnson added.
What it’s gonna take to dismantle white supremacy is white folks actually gotta give up something,” she said. “You have to actually sacrifice yourself. You have to be willing to give up the things that you currently benefit from.”
Since you continue to do your "I don't understand schtick" here is some info from their site.......................
11 Major Misconceptions About the Black Lives Matter Movement: http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/
FTA:
3. The movement has no agenda. Many believe the Black Lives Matter movement has no agenda — other than yelling and protesting and disrupting the lives of white people. This is also false. Since the earliest days of the movement in Ferguson, groups like the Organization for Black Struggle, the Black Lives Matter network, and others have made both clear and public a list of demands. Those demands include swift and transparent legal investigation of all police shootings of black people; official governmental tracking of the number of citizens killed by police, disaggregated by race; the demilitarization of local police forces; and community accountability mechanisms for rogue police officers. Some proposals like the recently launched Campaign Zero by a group of Ferguson activists call for body cameras on every police officer. But other groups are more reticent about this solution, since it would lead to increased surveillance and possible invasions of privacy, not to mention a massive governmental database of information about communities of color that are already heavily under surveillance by government forces.
4. It’s a one-issue movement. Although it is true that much of the protesting to date has been centered on the issue of police brutality, there is a range of issues that movement work will likely push in years to come. One is the issue of our failing system of public education, which is a virtual school-to-prison pipeline for many black youth. Another is the complete dismantling of the prison industrial complex.
-
......YOU'RE FIRED ! -
Obama privately says time is near for Sanders to end campaign and party to rally behind Clinton. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/us/politics/obama-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0&referer= …
This is a pretty good indication that Obama will order FBI and Justice to stand down on Hillary
Dem Civil War: ‘Hillary Won Confederacy’ Says Sanders Supporters Progressive Democrats of America
-
That's terrible ! How can we impose new regulations if things are getting better on their own ? ? ?
-
On Supreme Court, Republicans are playing by the Democrats’ rules
It’s “about a principle, and not a person,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday of his refusal to consider President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.
McConnell’s clearly right. And Obama’s party set that principle — the Biden rule.
In 1992, then-Judiciary Chairman Joe Biden warned sitting President George H.W. Bush not to try filling any high court vacancies. “Once the political season is under way,” Biden said, “action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee . . . Otherwise . . . we will be in deep trouble as an institution,” stuck in “a bitter fight, no matter how good a person is nominated by the president.”
He was no doubt feeling guilty about his own role in (successfully) demonizing Judge Robert Bork in 1986, and in the (failed) campaign of personal destruction against then-Judge Clarence Thomas in 1991. Biden might as well have said, We don’t want to smear another good man — so don’t send us one.
Late in the George W. Bush years, Sen. Chuck Schumer said much the same: “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation” lest the lame-duck president shift the court’s balance.
Here’s McConnell on Wednesday: “The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court . . . so of course the American people should have a say.”
Obama wants Garland to take Antonin Scalia’s seat — replacing a conservative with a liberal. It exactly mirrors the situation where Biden and Schumer drew their lines; why is he pretending the GOP might go along?
Again, McConnell has it right: “It seems clear President Obama made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed, but in order to politicize it for purposes of the election.”
That is, to try to paint Republicans as obstructionists for playing by the rules the Democrats set when they ran the Senate.
If Democrats want to change those rules, they’ll have to do it when it doesn’t nakedly serve their own partisan interest.
.
-
Yes, you are a racist because you know or should that "Black lives matters" means Black lives matter too It means NO such thing. Try telling that to a member of BLM and see what reaction you get.
when someone wears a pink band for Breast cancer awareness do you go up to them and say " you should be aware of all cancers not just breast cancer" What an incredibly inappropriate comparison. Let me know when the next breast cancer riot breaks out,.
Black Lives matter activists are not like those who work towards ending a disease. As a registered nurse for the past 35 years (and a cancer survivor) I am well aware of that.
I doubt it because even a racist like you knows that would be a dick move- but who knows? maybe during Autism awareness month you go around mumbling all developmental disabilities matter.
Thanks for demonstrating to all here, what a weak argument requiring anger and diversion looks like
-
Finishing 2nd, Donald Trump Got More Votes In Ohio Than Hillary Clinton
3/17/2016Democrats sound alarm against Trump................... (I'm sure they do!)
-
Pick a non-lawyer for the Supreme Court ! http://usat.ly/1pvDvob via @usatoday
-
NYTIMES places Garland to the left of Kagan, Breyer, slightly to right of Ginsberg,
Moderate ..........
.
-
And once again what's the plan to stop Mother Nature?
Richer nations giving Billions of dollars to poorer nations, of course.
-
As establishment candidate in a year of insurgency, Hillary can’t win
The Poisoning of a Population: The Flint Water Crisis
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted