2016 presidential election campaign 2

444 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Showmanship!

I'm reminded of The Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults.

I actually watched it when it aired, like millions of other rubes.

bekayne

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Showmanship!

I'm reminded of The Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults.

I actually watched it when it aired, like millions of other rubes.

All they found was a Nazi who threw a chair at his face

NorthReport

Trump vs Clinton debate will be Fri, Sep 30

swallow

Hey NorthReport, your links aren't working! 

contrarianna

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
The pre-release “torrent insurance” is currently encrypted and unreadable, but the file WikiLeaks issued evidently comes with what is called a dead-man’s switch. What this means is, if the U.S. federal government attempts to stop the data dump, the torrent insurance file has a key that is automatically activated under the right circumstances. Therefore, if the data dump does not occur on schedule, everyone who had downloaded the torrent insurance file would be automatically issued a key to unlock the file.

Um, OK, but why not just release it?  Doesn't information want to be free any more?  What's with "I've got a secret"?

I suppose could be all hot air, but that would not go over very well in the long run.

 It's not the first time an "insurance file" was used--with not much success-- as a tacic to disuade operations against the leakers before a collection could be "vetted" --which may include redactions of info that could put lives in danger.  Presumably, the "insurance file" would be a raw dump of the entire database.

From Wired in 2013:

Quote:
Snowden’s Contingency: ‘Dead Man’s Switch’ Borrows From Cold War, WikiLeaks
The strategy employed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden to discourage a CIA hit job has been likened to a tactic employed by the U.S. and Russian governments during the Cold War..... I

n 2010, Wikileaks published an encrypted “insurance file” on its web site in the wake of strong U.S. government statements condemning the group’s publication of 77,000 Afghan War documents that had been leaked to it by former Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning.

 https://www.wired.com/2013/07/snowden-dead-mans-switch/

The original Wikileaks-Manning encripted file  was blown by the once-friendly news partner of Assange at the Guardian, David Leigh, who published the AES password--an act that, in the most charatable interpretation, was stupid.
https://unspecified.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/wikileaks-password-leak-faq/

NorthReport

Mind boggling to think someone like Trump has the slightest possibility of becoming President

Trump's campaign is crashing and burning as he lurches from one fuckup to another. Today he fired his campaign manager who should never have been anywhere near that position in the first place gee I wonder who hired him, eh!

Hopefully he gets tossed as the GOP nominee in Cleveland Go Romney Go!

Aristotleded24

NorthReport wrote:
Mind boggling to think someone like Trump has the slightest possibility of becoming President Trump's campaign is crashing and burning as he lurches from one fuckup to another.

I'm not scared of Donald Trump. I'm scared because the Democrats have rigged the race to nominate a candidate who could lose to him.

oldgoat

Any thoughts on who Trump might pick as a running mate?  Other than himself of course.  I was thinking maybe Christie as a likely selection, but then for some reason the cold thought of Anne Coulter passed though my mind.  I'm not joking, it would really be a Trumpish thing to do.  Only problem would be fitting the two egos into the same room.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Well, there was a lot of talk a few weeks ago about a Trump/Gingrich ticket, and Newt and the Donald were saying nice things about each other. Also, (actual) billionaire Republican donor Sheldon Adelson really, really likes Newt, and apparently promised to contribute big bucks to Trump's campaign, should he pick Newt. However, it seems the Donald's feelings were hurt when Newt disapproved of Trump's smearing of Judge Curiel, and the ardour for this match has faded. Lately, I see Alabama senator Jeff Sessions mentioned a lot, and he seems to agree with Trump on many things, so he could be the one.

NDPP

Bernie's Capitulation and Hillary's Syrian War To Come

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/21/bernies-capitulation-and-hillarys...

"That's what I call disgraceful."

NDPP

Hillary Clinton's Likely Pentagon Chief Already Advocating For More Bombing and Intervention  -  by Glenn Greenwald

https://theintercept.com/2016/06/22/hillary-clintons-likely-pentagon-chi...

"It's long been beyond doubt that Clinton intends to embark upon a far more militaristic path than even Obama forged - which is saying a lot given that the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winnder has bombed 7 predominantly Muslim countries in 7 years.

Repeatedly, Clinton has implicitly criticized Obama for excessive hostility to Israel and to move closer to Netanyahu..."

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Well, at least we can hope that the Nobel committee won't make the mistake of giving her the Peace prize.

iyraste1313

According to a recent national poll from Bloomberg Politics, just over half, 55 percent, of the Vermont senator’s followers said they would toe the Democratic Party line by voting for Hillary. Twenty-two percent would rather vote for her putative nemesis, Donald Trump, while 18 percent claim they’ll abandon the Democrat-Republican duopoly entirely by supporting Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson.

Despite the coordinated effort by the corporate media to proffer Hillary as a viable, acceptable candidate — by both downplaying his followers’ dedication and mocking their devotion as obstinate foolishness that could land Trump in the White House — many of Sanders’ proponents remain steadfastly undeterred.

Indeed, as the poll proves, an arguably bigoted demagogue and a third-party quasi-outsider have nearly the same appeal as the Democratic establishment’s darling — and the sheer volume of voters who balk at the prospect of voting Clinton has exploded in just three months’ time.

 

josh

The same poll that showed Clinton up 49-37.

contrarianna

There's little doubt that the vile Clinton would win over the vile Trump.

Who would most likely bring on WW3 is not that clear.

Internationally, Clinton will be at least as aggressive as Bush/Cheney in a far more dangerous time globally.

NorthReport

Concerned that Brexit is going to give Trump's campaign a much needed boost and truth will be the first casualty.
Fox News has already started by stating yesterday that the UK was leaving the UN

josh

Clinton majority on platform committee voting down progressive proposals from the Sanders reps on Palestine and the TPP, while adopting some others.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/6d97a8dd20bf42f9b4c71244ac5b7466/democrat...

NorthReport

How American Politics Went Insane

It happened gradually—and until the U.S. figures out how to treat the problem, it will only get worse.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politic...

NDPP

BAR: Sanders Supporters Need To Split or Get Off the Pot  -  by Glen Ford

http://blackagendareport.com/need_a_social_democratic_party

"Things fall apart - messily. Bernie Sanders is trying to figure out how to capitulate to Hillary Clinton and her corporatist masters next month in Philadelphia..."

NorthReport

So Clinton was questioned for 3.5 hours by the FBI today.

The GOP must be kicking themselves to have allowed Trump to steal their party away them.

Great choice of candidates Americans are facing in their presidential election this year.  Frown

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Great choice of candidates Americans are facing in their presidential election this year.

Well, on the Republican side they had their choice of Jesus-freak, God-botherer, Deranged Jesus-freak or Trump.

On the Democrat side, they did have the choice of Sanders, didn't they?

NDPP

[Mr Victoria Nuland, arch PNAC Zio] Robert Kagan Will Host 'Major Fundraiser' For Hillary Clinton (audio)

http://sptnkne.ws/bA4u

"Neoconservatives who dominated the administration of US President George W Bush, may be demonized by the left for their support of the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, Gareth Porter admitted.

But, he argued, their hyper-interventionist position is not unacceptable among leftists who 'fancy themseles to be national security analysts,' and who are interested in American power in the world.'

He added that Clinton is much more extreme when it comes to foreign policy than Robert Gates, US Secretary of Defense in 2006-2011, who himself is a strong supporter of military force.

'What is most concerning about a Hillary Clinton administration is precisely that she was the cheerleader not only for the intervention in Libya but even more significantly at this moment for a military commitment by the US in Syria,' Porter said."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:

There's little doubt that the vile Clinton would win over the vile Trump.

Who would most likely bring on WW3 is not that clear.

If there's any good news, it's that the "WWIII BEGINS TOMORROW!!!!!" crowd can't lose.

Kick the tires and light the fires.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..more on what josh posted

Betraying Progressives, DNC Platform Backs Fracking, TPP, and Israel Occupation

quote:

The panel also rejected amendments suggested by 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben, another Sanders pick, that would have imposed a carbon tax, declared a national moratorium on fracking as well as new fossil fuel drilling leases on federal lands and waters.

"This is not a political problem of the sort that we are used to dealing with," McKibben stated during the marathon debate. "Most political problems yield well to the formula that we’ve kept adopting on thing after thing—compromise, we’ll go halfway, we’ll get part of this done. That’s because most political problems are really between different groups of people. They’re between industry and environmentalists. That is not the case here."

"Former U.S. Representative Howard Berman, American Federation of State, County, and Muncipal Employees executive assistant to the president, Paul Booth, former White House Energy and Climate Change Policy director Carol Browner, Ohio State Representative Alicia Reece, former State Department official Wendy Sherman, and Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden all raised their hands to prevent a moratorium from becoming a part of the platform," noted Shadowproof's Kevin Gosztola.

According to Gosztola's reporting on the exchange, Dr. Cornel West lambasted the aforementioned panel members, particularly Browner, for "endorsing reform incrementalism" in the face of an urgent planetary crisis.

"When you’re on the edge of the abyss or when you’re on that stove, to use the language of Malcolm X, you don’t use the language of incrementalism. It hurts, and the species is hurting," West said.

iyraste1313

june 22nd Washington Post somewhat eschewed the idea of election fraud in California by Alex Padilla because there is still time left for the vote count and quoted long-time journalist Greg Palast, who stated the following.

 

“I can tell you this: Senator Sanders won California. Let me do the math for you. Most of those late mailed-in ballots were what are called NPP, No Party Preference. These independent ballots were the ones that came in late because people had to switch their ballots. It’s a complex process, in California, that’s all I can tell you. The late ballots are Sanders ballots.”

NorthReport

To the victors go the spoils, eh! 

Seriously was anyone expecting anything else? The only reason Sanders was let anywhere near the reigns of power within the DNC is that it was rigged from the beginning, and he didn't have the slightest chance of winning, although he did a lot better than anyone expected, including himself. Most people already realized that I presume.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

NorthReport wrote:

To the victors go the spoils, eh! 

Seriously was anyone expecting anything else?

..yes but look how close the struggle is getting. could not imagine this a couple years ago.

NorthReport

You are dreaming in technicolour.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Wink so are you

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

epaulo13 wrote:

Wink so are you

I think our friend sees most things in black and white.

NDPP

How Hillary Clinton Ignores Peace  -  by Robert Parry, Consortium News

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/37798-how-hillary-clinton...

"In campaign 2016 the American people have shown little stomach for more foreign wars. The Republican candidates who advocated neoconservative warmongering crashed and burned, losing to Donald Trump, who sold himself to GOP voters as the anti-neocon, daring even to trash George W Bush's Iraq War to an aghast field of Republican rivals.

Only Hillary Clinton (who comes in at 39 percent) is carrying the neocon banner proudly in the general election, advocating a US 'regime change' invasion of Syria - dressed up as 'no fly zones' and 'safe zones' while she also cheers on more hostilities toward nuclear-armed Russia.

In Russia, the neocons dream about their ultimate 'regime change', dragging Vladimir Putin from the Kremlin and seeing him butchered much as happened to Iraq's Saddam Hussein and Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, their grisly deaths representing two of the 'highlights' of neocon domination of US foreign policy in recent decades.

Ironically, as much as US officialdom and its mainstream media  castigate RT and other Russian news outlets as 'propaganda', frankly, RT and the like are playing the role that the Northern press did during the civil rights era by carrying important stories about US peace protests while the NYT, WPost, CNN and MSNBC behave like the South's segregationist media did in the 1960s, dismissing or ignoring the dissent..."

josh
Aristotleded24

Ladies and gentlemen, President Donald Trump.

ygtbk

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/clinton-email-fbi-1.3665051

Quote:

"Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

But Comey also said Clinton and her colleagues at the Department of State had been "extremely careless" with classified material — noting that 110 emails, in 52 different email chains, contained classified information when Clinton sent them. Eight of those chains contained top secret information, he said. 

"None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system," he said. 

Quote:

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences," Comey allowed.

"To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now." 

Quote:

Lynch on Friday said that she would accept whatever findings and recommendations were presented to her. Though she said she had already settled on that process, her statement came days after an impromptu meeting with Bill Clinton on her airplane in Phoenix that she acknowledged had led to questions about the neutrality of the investigation. 

I'm guessing that either Comey missed a logic course, or he's assuming we can translate this into realpolitik all by ourselves.

 

 

josh

I'm guessing that some people know nothing about the law.  One can be careless without violating the law.

A big nothing burger from beginning to end. 

Debater

FBI Director James Comey on Hillary Clinton's emails:

- "Our judgement is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

- "We cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts."

- "No charges are appropriate in this case.

 

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/750348015622172673

Aristotleded24

josh wrote:
I'm guessing that some people know nothing about the law.  One can be careless without violating the law.

Not when it comes to handling high-level classified documentation you can't.

NorthReport

OK, it's a wrap. Clinton is a shoo in for the Presidency now.

ygtbk

NorthReport wrote:

OK, it's a wrap. Clinton is a shoo in for the Presidency now.

You may in fact be correct.

josh

Aristotleded24 wrote:

josh wrote:
I'm guessing that some people know nothing about the law.  One can be careless without violating the law.

Not when it comes to handling high-level classified documentation you can't.

Yes you can.

NorthReport

How the FBI’s Clinton E-Mail Decision Just Changed the 2016 Race

Trump is left with no choice but to attack the judicial process itself as corrupt.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-07-05/how-the-fbi-s-clin...

Aristotleded24

josh wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

josh wrote:
I'm guessing that some people know nothing about the law.  One can be careless without violating the law.

Not when it comes to handling high-level classified documentation you can't.

Yes you can.

[url=http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/37/793#sthash.GqwcSyiG.dpuf]No you can't (emphasis mine):[/url]

Quote:
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

josh

Aristotleded24 wrote:

josh wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

josh wrote:
I'm guessing that some people know nothing about the law.  One can be careless without violating the law.

Not when it comes to handling high-level classified documentation you can't.

Yes you can.

[url=http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/37/793#sthash.GqwcSyiG.dpuf]No you can't (emphasis mine):[/url]

Quote:
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Nothing was delivered to anyone in violation of her trust as secretary of state.  Nor was it removed from its proper place of custody, as there was no precedent preventing her from putting the information, as secretary of state, on her private server.  It's totally ridiculous to try to make this into a criminal matter.  If people want to get Clinton, this is not the matter on which to do it.  As I said, it's a big nothing.

ygtbk

As I implied in post #134, we are pretty plainly being told that the normal rules don't apply here.

So the answer is "Yes you can" if you're Hillary, and "No you can't" if you're just an ordinary member of the military.

A Secretary of State (and a lawyer, no less) would usually be presumed to have at least a rough knowledge of how to handle classified material. It must have been somewhere in the briefing books.

josh

Colin Powell among others did the same thing. It only has to do with her as Secretary of State because of her clearance level. If anything, she's receiving scrutiny that none of her predecessors received.

ygtbk
josh

Private server versus private e-mail. Who cares. For legal purposes, there's no distinction. There's no there there either way. No harm, no foul.

Aristotleded24

josh wrote:
Colin Powell among others did the same thing. It only has to do with her as Secretary of State because of her clearance level. If anything, she's receiving scrutiny that none of her predecessors received.

No he certainly did not. Powell may have had a private e-mail address, but it was still routed through State Department infrastructure. Clinton had her own private server, with no encryptions or protections, and government information that is classified ended up there. That's the issue. What's even more frightening is given the amount of information that was on the server, it's probable that al-Qaeda and ISIS have that information and can blackmail the US government with it, and there's no way that scenario can be ruled out with any degree of confidende.

josh

The issue is sloppiness, not criminality. Your final sentence is total conjecture. No proof that they could have or did.

NorthReport

Clinton not getting charged by the FBI will now sail through the rest of the election

But why did Clinton do it as it was no innocent mistake what was it she was trying to hide or get away with my hunch is she was trying to conceal something to avoid having to respond to a foi request

Pages

Topic locked