Hillary blames FBI Director Comey for her loss

[Cliff Varnell]

3 minutes ago, Robert Prudhomme said:

Hi Cliff

I've been reading up on the GW Bush administrstion, the private email server set up for the administration by the RNC and the roughly 22 million "lost" emails that still remain unaccounted for. You seem to know quite a bit on the topic of emails. Would you comment on this, and perhaps draw a parallel to the HRC email controversy? Thanks.

Hi Robert

In 2003 the Bush Administration outed an undercover CIA operative working on a project to deter Iran from building a nuke, Valerie Plame, in retribution for Plame's husband Joe Wilson calling bovine offal on Bush's Iraq War rationale.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/plame/Plame_KeyPlayers.html

Can you imagine what would have happened if that had occurred under Obama?

If you're Republican the corporate media gives you a pass on 22 million missing e-mails, but 33,000 non-missing Clinton e-mails became a non-stop non-scandal right up to election day.

 

 

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Good point Pat, the Palace File is an overlooked book.  It really shows the perfidy Nixon was involved with on Vietnam.

Dan, I never criticize anyone because they have not written a book. I appreciate people who post on this case here and at other places.  I always hold out the example of Charles Dunne,  To my knowledge he never wrote a published article or a book. We did not always agree, but he was astute and knowledgeable.  A much better writer and researcher than many book authors.

All I am saying here is that no one knows anything about there being any deliberate violation of the Hatch Act by Comey.  I am not a lawyer, but I think to commit a crime there has to be intent.  IMO, Comey is a fairly honest guy.  To compare him with Hoover is kind of wild. At least as far as I can see.  He explained what he did before he appeared before congress. And he kind of had to since Lynch compromised herself with that meeting with Bill Clinton. He said that because elf all the controversy he was trying to be transparent in the process.  

Was that the right decision? Who knows.  Maybe, but considering hindsight, probably not.  But again, if Comey had not made the second announcement, someone would have leaked it to Giuliani who would have.  Because the renegades in the FBI wanted to start an inquiry into the connection between the E Mail server and the Clinton Foundation. TO my knowledge, it did not get that far.

 

I checked out a bit after the election, but last I was paying attention, it had come out that Giuliani was predicting Comey's announcement two days before it occurred. This was a bit of a shock, seeing as Comey claimed he only learned about the Weiner-related emails the day before his announcement. When Giuliani was asked about this he at first bragged that he had inside information but then backed off when he realized he was begging for a federal investigation. He then lied through his teeth and said the big news he'd boasted was about to come out was entirely unrelated to Comey's announcement.

This needs to be investigated. Should Trump appoint Giuliani AG, it would smell to high-heaven, and fuel the fire that he'd been appointed in order to cover up his own criminal behavior. While this might sound a bit over-the-top one should consider Trump's current tactic in the Trump University fraud case. He's claiming that he's totally unprepared to be President and that it's in the national interest he spend every day between now and the inauguration preparing to be President, and that, as a result, it's in the national interest this case be delayed till after the inauguration. The fact his guilt is almost certain and he doesn't want to take the chance he'll get impeached before inaugurated, of course, has nothing to do with it...

Edited November 14, 2016 by Pat Speer

[Robert Prudhomme]

I read the article by Joe Wilson, "What I didn't find in Africa". He made an awful lot of sense, and basically put the lie to Cheney's claim that Saddam was purchasing yellow cake uranium from Niger; which placed the entire reason for going to war in Iraq in serious jeopardy and made prevaricators out of Bush and Cheney.

Small wonder they outed his CIA agent wife. I recall that weasel Bob Novak was the "reporter" they broke her outing to.

Edited November 14, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[Cliff Varnell]

IOKIYAR.

It's okay if you are Republican...

No, we have to demand accountability and a new Democratic Party.

[Glenn Nall]

that i may sleep well tonight, o lord, in the folds of a leftist's approval.

[Michael Walton]

Here you go, Cliff.  Even old Bernie Sanders doesn't think the Comey thing ruined HC's election chances.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/14/sanders-says-its-not-comeys-fault-that-clinton-lost/

Read the part - and the one I especially agree with - that explains why she really lost.  I'll give you a hint - it has nothing to do with Comey and everything to do with her being the candidate of the urban elite and losing touch with the blue-collar class, the people who voted the Democratic ticket for years.

I also want to mention that although I agree with Sanders, what HC did - downloading and uploading official government emails to a personal server - is a definite no-no.  Anyone else from a secretary to a media specialist to any other government employee would know better than to do that.  We all know that any of these people would have been reprimanded and probably even fired.  But for her and all of the excuses - "oh, she doesn't know tech" and all of this b####it, was really sickening to take and revealed pure hypocricy. 

[Cliff Varnell]

29 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Here you go, Cliff.  Even old Bernie Sanders doesn't think the Comey thing ruined HC's election chances.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/14/sanders-says-its-not-comeys-fault-that-clinton-lost/

Bernie's wrong on this one.

Comey really did elect Trump. Here's the data that shows it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/11/1596764/-Comey-really-did-elect-Trump-Here-s-the-data-that-shows-it?detail=email&link_id=13&can_id=a87eb07ae966d6f4c4f68864dbacc9c4&source=email-texas-coach-on-trumps-win-im-a-rich-white-guy-and-im-sick-to-my-stomach-thinking-about-it&email_referrer=texas-coach-on-trumps-win-im-a-rich-white-guy-and-im-sick-to-my-stomach-thinking-about-it___132568&email_subject=comey-really-did-elect-trump-heres-the-data-that-shows-it

Quote

Read the part - and the one I especially agree with - that explains why she really lost.  I'll give you a hint - it has nothing to do with Comey and everything to do with her being the candidate of the urban elite and losing touch with the blue-collar class, the people who voted the Democratic ticket for years.

I also want to mention that although I agree with Sanders, what HC did - downloading and uploading official government emails to a personal server - is a definite no-no.

Factually incorrect.

There were no State Dept rules or guidelines in regard to private servers -- in fact it was a widespread practice.

Comey singled out Hillary Clinton for being "extremely careless" but it was the entire State Department that had a culture of extreme carelessness.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/09/03/1566467/-Mother-Jones-Article-Clinton-Exonerated-by-FBI

Quote

Anyone else from a secretary to a media specialist to any other government employee would know better than to do that.

Factually incorrect.

Comey admitted under oath that any reasonable person would have made the same mistake.

Quote

We all know that any of these people would have been reprimanded and probably even fired.  But for her and all of the excuses - "oh, she doesn't know tech" and all of this b####it, was really sickening to take and revealed pure hypocricy. 

What's sickening is this fascist railroad job that put Trump in the White House.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Glenn Nall said:

that i may sleep well tonight, o lord, in the folds of a leftist's approval.

Sleep well in the folds of Medicare, Glenn.

Next year bye bye.

[Cliff Varnell]

I can honestly say with all sincerity that IF:

1)  Comey had come out 11 days before the election and loudly announced the FBI was looking into Trump's private server connected to a Russian bank

2)  2 days before the election Comey announced there was nothing to the suspicions

3) On Election Day Trump wins the popular vote by 2% but loses the electoral college

I know I'd be raising hell about a rigged election even thought my side "won."

[James DiEugenio]

That is CV's new one, "Factually Incorrect", which is now replacing :

"empty content reply"

Because you have late breaking voters, does not mean they were motivated by the FBI announcement.  The Trump campaign always predicted that there were a lot of people who were not going to declare they were ready to vote for Trump, but actually would vote for him.  This is called historically, the Bradley Effect.  It goes  back to the Tom Bradley/ George Deukmejian governor race in California. The Republicans were confident they were going to win, even though all the polls had Bradley winning.  Finally, one of their pollsters said, "We will win because we know many whites will not admit they will not vote for a black candidate."  The guy got fired for telling the truth, because that is what happened.

Now, how many women do you think would want to admit they were voting for a candidate who had a history of being a sexual groper and once said, "Got to grab their P-----ies!"?

Not many.  But that is what happened.  I am astonished by that one myself.

Now, this is also a guy who said he was going to deport 11 million illegals back to Central America.  How many Latinos do you think would tell someone they were going to vote for Trump under those circumstances?  Again not many.  

But again, Trump got a surprising 26 per cent of the Latino vote. And he got the majority of the white female vote, which is incredible.

So what the Trump polling revealed and what Nate Silver predicted, a huge uncertainty factor, and a very discounted undercurrent for a reluctant Trump voter, this was all real.  And its stunning to me how the arrogant, and self righteous  liberal blogosphere--TPM, Huffpo, and Daily Kos among others--continually denied this existed.  And now that they were shown to be oh so wrong, they fly like geese toward the Comey excuse because they don't want to admit just how misguided and blind they were in misleading all of their millions of liberal readers. 

Its hard to tell the truth sometimes.  Because you had so much invested in a wrong cause. And your modus vivendi necessitates that you continue to hide that wrong cause from your clients. The Liberal Blogosphere has turned out to be a giant mirage.

Edited November 15, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is CV's new one, "Factually Incorrect", which is now replacing :

"empty content reply"

Because you have late breaking voters, does not mean they were motivated by the FBI announcement.

 

The day before the Comey announcement CNN, MSNBC and somewhat to a lesser degree Fox News were focused on 2 stories -- Trump's refusal to release his tax returns, and his serial pussy grabbing.

On the trail Trump was openly ruminating about losing.

When Comey's Treason Letter became public the 3 cable networks seized on the e-mail "scandal" like ravenous hogs -- that was THE story over the last 11 days of the campaign.

Trump found renewed life, went back on message and he and his surrogates hammered the issue with all the free air-time the cable news networks could provide.

JD, you're going to tell us with a straight face that 11 straight days of intensely negative coverage had no impact on late breaking voters?

Edited November 15, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

Let me insert the meat of my argument since CV so pointedly cuts it out:

Because you have late breaking voters, does not mean they were motivated by the FBI announcement.  The Trump campaign always predicted that there were a lot of people who were not going to declare they were ready to vote for Trump, but actually would vote for him.  This is called historically, the Bradley Effect.  It goes  back to the Tom Bradley/ George Deukmejian governor race in California. The Republicans were confident they were going to win, even though all the polls had Bradley winning.  Finally, one of their pollsters said, "We will win because we know many whites will not admit they will not vote for a black candidate."  The guy got fired for telling the truth, because that is what happened.

Now, how many women do you think would want to admit they were voting for a candidate who had a history of being a sexual groper and once said, "Got to grab their P-----ies!"?

Not many.  But that is what happened.  I am astonished by that one myself.

Now, this is also a guy who said he was going to deport 11 million illegals back to Central America.  How many Latinos do you think would tell someone they were going to vote for Trump under those circumstances?  Again not many.  

But again, Trump got a surprising 26 per cent of the Latino vote. And he got the majority of the white female vote, which is incredible.

So what the Trump polling revealed and what Nate Silver predicted, a huge uncertainty factor, and a very discounted undercurrent for a reluctant Trump voter, this was all real.  And its stunning to me how the arrogant, and self righteous  liberal blogosphere--TPM, Huffpo, and Daily Kos among others--continually denied this existed.  And now that they were shown to be oh so wrong, they fly like geese toward the Comey excuse because they don't want to admit just how misguided and blind they were in misleading all of their millions of liberal readers. 

Its hard to tell the truth sometimes.  Because you had so much invested in a wrong cause. And your modus vivendi necessitates that you continue to hide that wrong cause from your clients. The Liberal Blogosphere has turned out to be a giant mirage.

 

The Bradley Effect is and was real whether you say it with a straight face or not. People will not always tell the truth to pollsters.  Nate Silver understood this and he got pilloried by Huffpo.  He was right and Huffpo apologized.

IMO, the Liberal Blogosphere has now become as bad, as agenda driven, and as debilitating as the  MSM.  

[Douglas Caddy]

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I checked out a bit after the election, but last I was paying attention, it had come out that Giuliani was predicting Comey's announcement two days before it occurred. This was a bit of a shock, seeing as Comey claimed he only learned about the Weiner-related emails the day before his announcement. When Giuliani was asked about this he at first bragged that he had inside information but then backed off when he realized he was begging for a federal investigation. He then lied through his teeth and said the big news he'd boasted was about to come out was entirely unrelated to Comey's announcement.

This needs to be investigated. Should Trump appoint Giuliani AG, it would smell to high-heaven, and fuel the fire that he'd been appointed in order to cover up his own criminal behavior. While this might sound a bit over-the-top one should consider Trump's current tactic in the Trump University fraud case. He's claiming that he's totally unprepared to be President and that it's in the national interest he spend every day between now and the inauguration preparing to be President, and that, as a result, it's in the national interest this case be delayed till after the inauguration. The fact his guilt is almost certain and he doesn't want to take the chance he'll get impeached before inaugurated, of course, has nothing to do with it...

Pat: The FBI and NYPD knew in April that Huma's emails were stored on Weiner's laptop. I believe FBI agents working with NYPD withheld this information from Comey until the last moment, forcing him to act. This was the trap that had been set which Giuliani alluded to in his TV interview in a secretive, boastful manner.

If Giuliani in nominated for a cabinet post, you can take it to the bank the Democrats on the Senate committee that will vote on his nomination before it goes to the Senate Floor will grill him thoroughly. This is a time-bomb for the Republicans because it could open up the whole issue whether the FBI rigged the outcome of the presidential election. My guess is that investigative journalists are already in pursuit of this hot story. There will be books later, too.

The people marching in mass protests around the country sense what has happened. Here in Houston and around the country plans are being made now to stage immense mass protests on the day that Trump is inaugurated as president.

[James DiEugenio]

Doug:

Now that is interesting.  Do you have a good source for this info?

[Cliff Varnell]

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Let me insert the meat of my argument since CV so pointedly cuts it out:

Yes, because your analysis of late-breaking voters ignores the impact of 11 days of 24-hour Clinton bashing, so you pretend to have an argument by repeating the rest of your nonsense.

Quote

Because you have late breaking voters, does not mean they were motivated by the FBI announcement.

Not in and of itself, but given 11 straight days of negative press coverage it's a safe conclusion to reach.

Quote

 

 The Trump campaign always predicted that there were a lot of people who were not going to declare they were ready to vote for Trump, but actually would vote for him.  This is called historically, the Bradley Effect.  It goes  back to the Tom Bradley/ George Deukmejian governor race in California. The Republicans were confident they were going to win, even though all the polls had Bradley winning.  Finally, one of their pollsters said, "We will win because we know many whites will not admit they will not vote for a black candidate."  The guy got fired for telling the truth, because that is what happened.

Now, how many women do you think would want to admit they were voting for a candidate who had a history of being a sexual groper and once said, "Got to grab their P-----ies!"?

Not many.  But that is what happened.  I am astonished by that one myself.

Now, this is also a guy who said he was going to deport 11 million illegals back to Central America.  How many Latinos do you think would tell someone they were going to vote for Trump under those circumstances?  Again not many.  

But again, Trump got a surprising 26 per cent of the Latino vote. And he got the majority of the white female vote, which is incredible.

So what the Trump polling revealed and what Nate Silver predicted, a huge uncertainty factor, and a very discounted undercurrent for a reluctant Trump voter, this was all real.  And its stunning to me how the arrogant, and self righteous  liberal blogosphere--TPM, Huffpo, and Daily Kos among others--continually denied this existed.  And now that they were shown to be oh so wrong, they fly like geese toward the Comey excuse because they don't want to admit just how misguided and blind they were in misleading all of their millions of liberal readers. 

The Comey-apologist won't admit the Bradley Effect is a myth.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/persistent-myth-of-bradley-effect/

Quote

 

Its hard to tell the truth sometimes.  Because you had so much invested in a wrong cause. And your modus vivendi necessitates that you continue to hide that wrong cause from your clients. The Liberal Blogosphere has turned out to be a giant mirage.

 

Meanwhile, Hillary will win the popular vote by close to 2% and Comey committed a crime when he changed the entire campaign 11 days out.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Cliff Varnell