Release The Memo
- Thread starter Clean
- Start date
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I wish the name were changed to "the Kracken"
Can you imagine Pelosi crying about the Kracken being released?
Taking the position that Hillary did something sleazy and dangerous but that you're voting for her anyway, because you think Trump is worse is a defensible position. That's the reverse position that many conservatives took to justify voting for Trump. That's not the position most Democrats took. They largely dismissed the e-mail investigation as a waste of time and a partisan investigation, and that's my recollection of what your position was. And I hate to hassle you about it and call you on on it, because you've actually made a lot of progress recently. lol
That was my opinion of the Benghazi Investigations ... which in my opinion was exploitation of a tragedy not unlike other suffered by US diplomatic/military personnel in every administration of my lifetime. I never defended Hillary on the emails... though I may have poked fun of some of her ham-handed critics. I guess I did accept Comey's combo of criticism of the behavior but deciding it did not reach the level of being worthy of worthy of prosecution.
I don't remember NJ Longhorn, Seattle Husker nor any other regular poster defending her private server.
Last edited:
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
I didn't remember one way or the other what @Crockett said pre-election, so I did a quick search for every time Crockett posted the word "Hillary". Here was the first relevant post (from July 11, 2016) I came across:
If this one post was representative, it doesn't sound like he's dismissing the claims against Hillary -- he's just saying Trump is worse.
Of course, there could be other posts that paint a different picture.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
In my own defense, I was always critical of the many Benghazi investigations as politically driven. Previously, I've said that HRC's email was a valid investigation. I may have pushed back on specific hyperbole or misstatements but the investigation was justified. HRC was an idiot for having her own email server in light of the scrutiny she knew she'd get in a POTUS race. Fortunately, the investigation showed that there was very limited classified/confidential email in that system. Still, the damage to her campaign from the email usage was 100% self inflicted.
I didn't say anything about them. SH had a similar view to yours on Benghazi, but I don't recall any kind of defense or dismissal of the e-mail matter. And I don't recall NJ ever defending Hillary on anything.
(By the way, I agree that the GOP has overblown many of their allegations at both Clintons. However, the Benghazi investigation did prove that the Administration lied about the attack. To me, uncovering the lie was worthwhile, but that's another discussion which we've already had.)
Here's the post that bugged me about your approach on the e-mail investigation. It was dismissive, and the bottom line is that she was beneath and unworthy of your defense or mitigation or whatever we're going to call it.
This was my response.
Hillary is liar... but she wouldn't lie about something as easily debunked as how many people were on the Mall during the inauguration or what audience share was generated by the State of the Union address.
I don't especially like it ... but I read somewhere that there is a great correlation between people's ability to lie effectively and their ability to take leadership positions. 2016 presidential race supplies supporting evidence.
If you are going to dismiss my feelings as a BS hater because i'd rather step in bull feces than dog feces.... (I've stepped in both) .. ya got me.
I don't especially like it ... but I read somewhere that there is a great correlation between people's ability to lie effectively and their ability to take leadership positions. 2016 presidential race supplies supporting evidence.
If you are going to dismiss my feelings as a BS hater because i'd rather step in bull feces than dog feces.... (I've stepped in both) .. ya got me.
I've been neutral so far on this memo but watching the MSM and the FBI's reaction is making me believe in the memo. They're acting like people who are in panic mode.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Full on panic mode
It does make you wonder what they are they so afraid of?
Even some Dems must be curious about this by now
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
She wouldn't have needed to, because the media would have never been a risk of understating it. She lied about having to dodge gunfire getting onto a transport. How hard was that to debunk?
But regardless... I'm not sure its a valid argument because some people lie casually about things that don't matter. I have no idea whether Trump is truthful or not on the big things, but I know Hillary isn't.
If the FBI is telling the truth they would have no reason to be be scared. If Nunes is the one lying(or cherry picking) the FBI has all of the documentation with them that can make him look like a fool. They have all of the cards. So why are they acting the way they are? It doesn't make sense unless they're trying to hide something.
Last edited:
Media is plural. If you think none of them would call out a Hillary Clinton lie ... that's interesting.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
I don't count Fox in that, as I'm sure you'd agree, they would dissect everything she said and spin it negative. But no, I don't think any major news outlet would hear Hillary talk about the estimate size of the crowd and say "let's fact check that... nope, she lied about it." At BEST, they would have said something like "Mrs Clinton may have exaggerated, as the crowds were estimated at.... But still, there's no doubt it was a huge crowd."
The Dems are fighting it because it destroys the Trump-Russian collusion story. The memo may not be that bad in the sense it may be that protocols were only pushed to the legal limit, BUT politically Dems do NOT want the Russian collusion thing to go away as it would mean they lose their only connection to their base.
Last edited:
It does expose them even more as the duplicitous losers they are, but they will still cling to their daily racism claims.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
If the FBI is hot on the trail of something serious, and if releasing the memo compromises that, we will all feel like idiots for being so impatient. I don’t think it’s likely, but it’s not impossible either.
I think that begs an interesting question. Would you rather be lied to about something that's easily debunked or about something that requires congressional investigations, special prosecutors, forensic experts, lawyers, judges, and tens of millions of dollars to debunk? Which is more harmful? I think the latter is more harmful.
The problem is that you don't talk like a BS hater unless you're talking about Trump. You rip him when he brags about crowd size, cock size, audience size, and other things that are pretty inconsequential, and by the way, there's nothing wrong with ripping him for that. I've done it plenty myself. It's juvenile, unpresidential, and often false. However, you rationalize and engage in "whataboutism" when Hillary lied about things like how terror attacks occurred, and of course, every facet of the e-mail investigation.
I also notice a tendency to redirect to Trump's deficiencies when talking about Hillary. Of course, the legion of Trump supporters here did the exact same thing to criticize my decision not to vote for Trump. I told them that Hillary's many downsides were not a justification to relax one's standards to vote for Trump. I'd be inconsistent if I didn't take the same approach with your rationale, which is no more justifiable. Trump's many downsides were not a justification to relax one's standards to vote for Hillary.
And he very well may lie about consequential things, but you have pretty conclusive proof that Hillary lied about very consequential things. Again, her flaws don't suggest honesty or integrity in Trump. They're separate matters.
Maybe the FBI is not on the trail of something serious. Maybe they have committed crimes in order to serve their own values, which others have rejected via an election. Maybe releasing the memo actually solves a serious problem.
Clean
5,000+ Posts
I think Trump often gets tagged as a liar by the MSM that hates him when he should only be charged with misdemeanor exaggeration.
Yesterday he told the Republicans in W. Virginia his SOTU speech was the most watched ever. It wasn't. He drew good numbers but not even close to Bush's SOTU after 9-1-1. Trump likes to paint positive narratives in his speeches and tweets. Sometimes he bends the facts, like about the mall crowd-size at his inauguration. If it was BO making those harmless claims, it wouldn't get a second look.
Yesterday he told the Republicans in W. Virginia his SOTU speech was the most watched ever. It wasn't. He drew good numbers but not even close to Bush's SOTU after 9-1-1. Trump likes to paint positive narratives in his speeches and tweets. Sometimes he bends the facts, like about the mall crowd-size at his inauguration. If it was BO making those harmless claims, it wouldn't get a second look.
They are far more haphazard in using the terms "lie" or "liar" with Trump than I've ever seen them with anybody else. If Trump says something inaccurate, he's a liar. If a Democrat says something inaccurate, he or she "misspoke," "wasn't completely truthful," or "had inaccuracies in his statement." That's true even if there's conclusive proof that he or she knew the statement was false at the time it was made.
They wouldn't ignore it. There'd be the obligatory fact check on page 37, and it wouldn't have a hint of judgment and would use whatever context was necessary to make the statement sound more authoritative and "closer to the truth" than it actually was. It would say, "President Obama's statement that his speech had the largest audience is all time was not completely accurate. However, it was the highest rated program on television that night, and no President who was over 6 feet tall and gave an address on an evening in which the sun set at 6:27 p.m. and in which the high temperature was 41 degrees has ever spoken to a larger audience."
Last edited:
I agree, but what does that have to do with Hillary?
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
