Blame Bill

[Dene]

I laughed pretty hard when I read this paragraph about Comey's testimony.
Essentially, the reason HRC is not President is because of the "Bill n Lynch Tarmac meeting", where they discussed grandchildren.

Justice served....LOL!!

----------------------------
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-director-james-comey-mildly-nauseated-clinton-email-probe-decisions-may-have-impacted-election/ar-BBAFE8A?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Nevertheless, the director acknowledged that he "worried'' about the Justice Department's credibility to resolve the inquiry after Lynch's impromptu meeting with former President Bill Clinton last summer when their planes were parked nearby at the Phoenix's Sky Harbor International Airport. So, Comey said he took it upon himself to first publicly announce the outcome of the FBI's inquiry in July and then re-open it in October. "Her meeting...was the capper,'' Comey said.
Still, the director added, "I wouldn't have done anything differently. I don't have any regrets.''

Clinton has blamed Comey as recently as Tuesday for torpedoing her campaign as the Democratic presidential nominee. The FBI ultimately cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing on the weekend before the election.

[-hh]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> I laughed pretty hard when I read this paragraph about Comey's testimony.
> Essentially, the reason HRC is not President is because of the "Bill n Lynch
> Tarmac meeting", where they discussed grandchildren.
>
> Justice served....LOL!!

Justice? Not until Comey is held accountable his gross violations of the Hatch Act.

> The FBI ultimately cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing on
> the weekend before the election.

Irrelevant, as the intervention was already done and couldn't be undone.

While Comey *claims* that he had no other options, there's at least
one very obvious one AFAIC: write & sign a Memo which details what
the Weiner laptop concerns were and CLASSIFY it under the auspices
of non-intervention as per the Hatch Act, with a "Declassify On"
date being one day after the Election.

Problem Solved.

How/Why? First, because the memo would have formally put the
concern on the record, so that he would be protected from accusations
of inaction, and his BS claim that it was violating prior testimony.
It would have done so with a formal gag which prevents any real
or perceived conflicts of interest with the election (IAW Hatch).
It also would have provided the ways & means to make sure that
there's no leaks ... while also allowing FBI staff to continue
to work the question in said classified environment to find out
the potential answer. The net result would have been that on
November 9th, 2016, there would have been a report that said,
"We found more possible evidence, looked into it, and found nothing".


-hh

[Dene]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 1:57:34 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> > I laughed pretty hard when I read this paragraph about Comey's testimony.
> > Essentially, the reason HRC is not President is because of the "Bill n Lynch
> > Tarmac meeting", where they discussed grandchildren.
> >
> > Justice served....LOL!!
>
> Justice? Not until Comey is held accountable his gross violations of the Hatch Act.
>
>
> > The FBI ultimately cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing on
> > the weekend before the election.
>
> Irrelevant, as the intervention was already done and couldn't be undone.

Why?

Here is my take. His announcement and subsequent clearing had no effect on the election. She lost because she had no message. She can blame Bill, Comey, the Russkies all she wants but the buck stops with her.

Americans in key battleground states rejected her. Simple as that.

Perhaps in her upcoming book, she will actually take responsibility.

Perhaps...

[John B.]

That is not why she lost. She had a very clear message, but voters
weren't interested in it. Maybe that's because she did a poor job
of articulating it. She lost because voters just didn't like her for
one reason or another. Message had nothing to do with it and seldom
does in a presidential election.

[Dene]

We might be saying the same thing. I think her message was the continuation of Obama's policies and the denunciation of Trump...which the voters rejected. I also agree they didn't like her...or Trump. It came down to jobs, gridlock, and the supreme court.

[Alan Baker]

And yet three million MORE US citizens voted for her than voted for Trump...

[-hh]

Greg wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
>> > I laughed pretty hard when I read this paragraph about Comey's testimony.
>> > Essentially, the reason HRC is not President is because of the "Bill n Lynch
>> > Tarmac meeting", where they discussed grandchildren.
>> >
>> > Justice served....LOL!!
>>
>> Justice? Not until Comey is held accountable his gross violations of the Hatch Act.

Hmmm...

(And ditto for the editing cut proving him wrong on "no choice")

>> > The FBI ultimately cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing on
>> > the weekend before the election.
>>
>> Irrelevant, as the intervention was already done and couldn't be undone.
>
> Why?

In simplest terms, because her dip in her polling numbers from his announcement never
returned to where they were when he said she was cleared. That's permanent damage.

> Here is my take. His announcement and subsequent clearing had no effect on the election.

Except the polls proved otherwise.

> She lost because she had no message. She can blame Bill, Comey, the Russkies all
> she wants but the buck stops with her.

Except that meddling by the Russians is now known. As such, we can't blithely ignore it anymore.

> Americans in key battleground states rejected her. Simple as that.

And with extremely small margins, but the "winner takes all" process made it appear bigger.

> Perhaps in her upcoming book, she will actually take responsibility.
> Perhaps...

Perhaps, but given the psychology of denial we so regularly see here, it's just as unlikely
as reading any concessions made here.


-hh

[Dene]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 3:01:42 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
> Greg wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> >> > I laughed pretty hard when I read this paragraph about Comey's testimony.
> >> > Essentially, the reason HRC is not President is because of the "Bill n Lynch
> >> > Tarmac meeting", where they discussed grandchildren.
> >> >
> >> > Justice served....LOL!!
> >>
> >> Justice? Not until Comey is held accountable his gross violations of the Hatch Act.
>
> Hmmm...
>
> (And ditto for the editing cut proving him wrong on "no choice")
>
>
> >> > The FBI ultimately cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing on
> >> > the weekend before the election.
> >>
> >> Irrelevant, as the intervention was already done and couldn't be undone.
> >
> > Why?
>
> In simplest terms, because her dip in her polling numbers from his announcement never
> returned to where they were when he said she was cleared. That's permanent damage.

The polls that said Trump was losing right up to election day?

> > Here is my take. His announcement and subsequent clearing had no effect on the election.
>
> Except the polls proved otherwise.

The polls that said Trump was losing right up to election day?

> > She lost because she had no message. She can blame Bill, Comey, the Russkies all
> > she wants but the buck stops with her.
>
> Except that meddling by the Russians is now known. As such, we can't blithely ignore it anymore.

But the effect is unknown. I think one of her key errors was the "deplorable" comment. It certainly affected my view of her. I was intending to vote for her right up until the last week.

> > Americans in key battleground states rejected her. Simple as that.
>
> And with extremely small margins, but the "winner takes all" process made it appear bigger.

Irrelevant. Trump won Florida, Penn., Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

> > Perhaps in her upcoming book, she will actually take responsibility.
> > Perhaps...
>
> Perhaps, but given the psychology of denial we so regularly see here, it's just as unlikely
> as reading any concessions made here.

Agree....which is one more reason she wasn't a good choice for POTUS.

[Alan Baker]

Where his margins of victory were (respectively): 1.2%, 0.7%, 0.3%,
0.7%, and 8.1%

You don't think that the Russian's actions along with Comey's could have
swayed things by a couple of percentage points, but her use of the the
word "deplorable" was key?

[Alan Baker]

Funny you didn't mention this exchange:

'On Wednesday, Comey said Russia's cyberwarfare capacity presented the
"greatest threat of any nation on earth."

"Is it fair to say that the Russian government is still involved in
American politics?'' Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked.

"Yes," Comey said.'

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-05-03 3:58 PM, Moderate wrote:
> "John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

>>
>> That is not why she lost. She had a very clear message, but voters
>> weren't interested in it. Maybe that's because she did a poor job
>> of articulating it. She lost because voters just didn't like her for
>> one reason or another. Message had nothing to do with it and seldom
>> does in a presidential election.
>>
>

> Or maybe because she ignored PA, WI and MI against the advice of
> her ground people.
>
> Hillary won the popular vote, she simply ran a bad campaign.
>
> Crimes were committed and Comey took it apon himself to be cop and
> prosecutor, because he felt the Obama WH was too corrupt.
> That
> was his crime.
>
> In a truly bipartisan environment she would be in jail along with
> her cohorts. Hillary caused herself to lose.
>
> Thank God!
>

Comey, the director of the FBI and a Republican decided charges weren't
warranted and Obama's cabinet secretary had recused herself...

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-05-03 6:09 PM, Moderate wrote:
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

>>>
>>
>> Where his margins of victory were (respectively): 1.2%, 0.7%, 0.3%,
>> 0.7%, and 8.1%
>>
>> You don't think that the Russian's actions along with Comey's could have
>> swayed things by a couple of percentage points, but her use of the the
>> word "deplorable" was key?
>>
>

> Russians? Podesta gave away his password like a child. The
> mistakes made by the Clinton campaign aren't the Russians
> fault.
>

No, doofus.

That is NOT what they're investigating.

[-hh]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 7:13:32 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 3:01:42 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
> > Greg wrote:
> > > -hh wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> > >> > I laughed pretty hard when I read this paragraph about Comey's testimony.
> > >> > Essentially, the reason HRC is not President is because of the "Bill n Lynch
> > >> > Tarmac meeting", where they discussed grandchildren.
> > >> >
> > >> > Justice served....LOL!!
> > >>
> > >> Justice? Not until Comey is held accountable his gross violations of the Hatch Act.
> >
> > Hmmm...
> >
> > (And ditto for the editing cut proving him wrong on "no choice")
> >
> >
> > >> > The FBI ultimately cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing on
> > >> > the weekend before the election.
> > >>
> > >> Irrelevant, as the intervention was already done and couldn't be undone.
> > >
> > > Why?
> >
> > In simplest terms, because her dip in her polling numbers from his announcement never
> > returned to where they were when he said she was cleared. That's permanent damage.
>
> The polls that said Trump was losing right up to election day?

Yes, those polls. Did they not have adequate resolution to show that Comey's
announcement was visible in them?

> > > Here is my take. His announcement and subsequent clearing had no effect on the election.
> >
> > Except the polls proved otherwise.
>
> The polls that said Trump was losing right up to election day?

Yes, those polls ... and you're trying to avoid the point.

> > > She lost because she had no message. She can blame Bill, Comey, the Russkies
> > > all she wants but the buck stops with her.
> >
> > Except that meddling by the Russians is now known. As such, we can't blithely
> > ignore it anymore.
>
> But the effect is unknown.

Just because it is unknown doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
And you can't prove that its effect was zero.

> I think one of her key errors was the "deplorable" comment. It certainly affected
> my view of her. I was intending to vote for her right up until the last week.

Oh, so *you* changed your own mind right when Comey's investigation stuff
was breaking in the news ... are you really sure that it had utterly **zero** effect
on influencing your undecided position?

Particularly since her "deplorable" remark was made on 9 .. SEPTEMBER.

Yes, two months before the election...and seven weeks before you claimed to
have made up your mind.

In any event, there's always dozens of mistakes in anything and one of these
will always be labelled the worst one. And to try to pick Hillary's "worst" has
a huge amount of mistakes made to wade through.

But let's also not forget that there had also been a years-long ongoing campaign
which started even before the election to try to influence the public's opinions,
with the classical example being Benghazi - - not only was there the repeated
theater of witchhunts in front of Congress, behind the scenes, the Republican
legislatures never followed through on making the appropriations for enhanced
Embassy security that their own reports said were critically necessary.

Remember this fact for the next time that a US Embassy is attacked & our citizens killed.

> > > Americans in key battleground states rejected her. Simple as that.
> >
> > And with extremely small margins, but the "winner takes all" process made it appear bigger.
>
> Irrelevant.

Not so, because Trump still lost the popular vote.

> Trump won Florida, Penn., Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

Only Ohio was really a generous margin:

OH: (population 11.6M): margin of 446,841 votes (51.3% vs 43.2%)

That one is a quite clear margin. But:

Florida (pop 20M): a margin of 112,911 votes (49.1% vs 47.7%)
PA (pop 12.8M): margin of 67,416 votes (48.2% vs 47.5%)
WI (pop 5.8M)I: margin of 22,748 votes (47.2% vs 46.5%)
MI (pop 10M): margin of 10,704 votes (47.3% vs 47.0%)

Do the above as deltas of their total populations to account for
nonvoters and FL's 1.4% apparent margin drops to 0.6%. Similarly,
the others become deltas of 0.5%, 0.4% and 0.1%.

> > > Perhaps in her upcoming book, she will actually take responsibility.
> > > Perhaps...
> >
> > Perhaps, but given the psychology of denial we so regularly see here, it's just
> > as unlikely as reading any concessions made here.
>
> Agree....which is one more reason she wasn't a good choice for POTUS.

Again you chose to avoid the point: all people regularly do this.

For example, try to show us that Donald is better at admitting his mistakes.

Good luck with that one. Really.

Considering how he just ended a CBS interview this past week when he was
pressed on his "Obama Wiretapping" claims, the evidence is indicating that
he's even worse than the average scum sucking lying swampy politician.


-hh