The Case For Biden

Please..

Clinton was just on a stage comparing the Republican candidates to terrorists that murder and enslave women.

The comparison is beyond absurd and anyone on the right who gets agitated by it is being foolish.

But I can see how agitated you are by Trumps suggestion that she may soon be facing criminal charges (Isn't the chance of criminal prosecution much greater for anyone investigated by the FBI) and, if she is, of course her campaign will be over.

These clowns say all sorts of things (as demonstrated by Clinton) but Trump never even hinted or joked she should be shot. You're projecting

Well Hillary was speaking the honest to goodness truth and should be given a medal!

I agree with Hillary Clinton One Hundred Percent!

Clinton is right on target! What other name can be applied to some Republicans who suggests a young woman impregnated by her father should go through nine months and give birth? How else can one describe someone who thinks a woman impregnated by a rapist should have the child?

PUHLEEZ! GIMME A FU*KING BREAK!!!!!!!

I have to agree that I was taken aback by the comparison as well.

I don't think anyone has sugested Hillary will be shot. However the fact that General Petraeus pled guilty and was convicted of the unauthorized sharing of his classified information with a biographer (who incidently did have a security clerarance, but not the authorization to see the material in question), does suggest that criminal charges are at least a possibility in this matter.

I believe most of us are confident the current administration will not pursue this matter with any more vigor than they have others that might embarrass them, and that is likely Hillary's salvation in this matter. The fact is that routine official communications with most senior state department officials are normally classified, and that the strong likelihood is that she violated the law.

Will you please explain your statement. It's not too clear.

I think Revelette was saying that you are doing a fine job in your defense of Hillary Clinton...an admirable job of it...

...but be careful not to step over the line these other characters so often step over.

The "shoot her" comment WAS over the line.

You see how stupid it is when they do it...don't do it yourself.

Actually I didn't see a "shoot her" comment. You are right that is beyond over the line. I was taken aback when I read an article (I read so many I am not sure where) where Hillary compared the GOP to terrorist. It reminded too much of when republicans here and on news pundits and such did the same when we were rightfully against the Iraq war. The comparison is overused much like the Hitler comparison. Just my opinion.

You are correct, Frank, words do matter.,,,,Many times one's emotions get in the way of rational thinking. Thanks for helping me keep my head screwed on straight.

The Mass Incarceration Bill That Could Break Biden 2016

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/32108-the-mass-incarceration-bill-that-could-break-biden-2016

Twenty-one years after helping to pass the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act as a Delaware senator, Joe Biden is still touting it.

“It put another 100,000 cops on the street, and it cost $1 billion,” he wrote in April, in a release through NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice. “But because crime was rampant, everybody signed on. And it worked.”

The landmark legislation, now known as the 1994 Biden Crime Bill, was expansive and wide-reaching, and it outlaws civilian ownership of assault rifles, possibly the most substantial gun ban in recent American history.

But advocates for prison reform, one of the key issues in the upcoming 2016 presidential race, say one part of the bill is indefensible and contributed to the mass incarceration problem that has made America the most imprisoned citizenry in the Western world.

“It’s a big bill, but it’s a pretty bad bill,” said Marc Mauer, the executive director of the Sentencing Project. “There’s no question it was designed to be a tough on crime bill. That’s how President Clinton talked about it at his State of the Union address. The only reason there’s some half-decent stuff in there is because the Congressional Black Caucus was very adamant about the direction of the bill.”

If Biden decides to run in 2016, he could face questions about the so-called 1994 Biden Crime Bill, which created financial incentives for states to jail more people and keep them in prison for considerably longer sentences.

No, it doesn't suggest that at all. Patraues shared classified information that was clearly marked classified with someone that didn't have security clearance for the specific information. Emails to other state department employees is hardly the sharing of info with persons not authorized.

The emails in question were not considered classified by the State Department since they were released under an FOIA request. It is only later that an IG said they should have been classified.

You are assuming there is nothing here that has not yet been revealed. Moreover the Intelligence IGs noted that in the e mails cited so far that the materials in question should have been classified at the time and that the Secvretary of State is the responsible official for that. Her defense in this area is based on the false notion that she was a passive observer of classification labels fixed only by others. That is clearly false, but certainly emblematic classsical Clinton defense deceptions. She was the Seretary of State and she issued directives to all State employees to comply with Federal directives for the use of government e mail systems for official business, while she operated exclusively off a server in her home - this was a very significant departure from the occasional use of non government systems by her predecessors who themselves operated under earlier and more permissive rules then extant.

So, Clinton should have known they were classified before opening up her email? The emails originated with State Department employees and forwarded to her.




State Dept statement on Clinton emails

The whole conversation should be moved over to a Clinton thread, but anyway, the following is a very good in depth article which explains the few emails (so far) and question of classification and how the whole story got completely skewed at which of course republicans are taking full advantage (or Bernie supporters) The gist of all this is turf wars between the State Department and Intelligence over classifications.

The Clinton rules are at the heart of the New York Times's botched Hillary story

As I have said before I am a Biden supporter but I can't stand to see this same ole stuff being played again, it never ends. Another reason to elect Biden.

That does bother me, and Sanders views are a plus re that aspect, to me. I'd give Biden some time to rethink, though.

Not to mention if the Clinton through the clinton server was the only way to get to clinton by email she is asking us to believe that she had the expectation that no email sent to her, or that she sent, would have secret information. That is about three steps beyond believable.

If that's true (and I doubt it's the whole story) then who but the Head of the Agency was responsible for that? Her job was to enforce standards and lead the department, not adjust her own behavior to the lowest common denominator. I wouldn't accept an excuse like that from a junior engineer on a simple design project. Why should we accept it from one who presumes to take the highest ansd most responsible job in our government? It appears that, in your efforts to rationalize her bad personal and leadership behavior, there is truly no level to which you will not stoop.

Sounds as though Revelette realizes getting down there...is the only way to communicate with those who are already there, George!

Keep fighting the good fight, Revelette.

It is working...despite what is being said in response.

I don't think "it is working " very well at all. Public confidence in Hillary appears to be continuing a fairly steady decline with no bounce back in sight. Worse for her, Hillary's self-absorption and lack of real empathy continues to come across very clearly in her largely inept efforts to demean her critics and dismiss these matters as merely innocous details stirred up by malevolant opponents. The Democrat establisment is torn by the conflicting needs to protect her (still their best bet in the election) and at the same time start developing a menaningful alternative (which Bernie is not) in case she fails. Doing the latter risks accelerating her fall, while doing nothing may leave them holding the bag. A tough situation.

Meanwhile the Republican establishment faces a somewhat analogous dilemma with a bombastic Trump who appears to defy the odds in tapping what I speculate is a growing public weariness with an increasingly opprssive cant of political correctitude and establishment group think that surrounds them. Can Republicans develop other candidates while this show continues?? Hard to tell.

All this suggests to me that the public is increasingly restless and ready for change. Hard to predict in what direction it might go, but this does not appear to be a good year for the conventional party favorites of any stripe.

Kinda, but it has most to do with a political class that does not tell the truth and does not have a clue how to do their jobs. We have lost faith in them. Anything else is a better bet. Hillary, Bush and Walker are the elites people. We the people might have a different plan.