State Department misled on Hillary Clinton emails, investigation concludes

I was not referring to the Inspector General, who I had lauded in my previous post. I was referring to the Republican candidates, congressmen and talking heads that have been clamoring for an investigation of Clinton's email servers. With this group, it is obvious and inevitable that they are more concerned with political advantage than they are with honest governance.

And given that democrats' argument is essentially to conflate more-or-less honest efforts at transparency and accountability undertaken by parties like the AP or the Inspector General with the partisan and cynical efforts to disparage a candidate undertaken by various republican agents, I think you essentially fall into the trap when you try to deny any ulterior motives by anyone. Democrats would point to some Limbaugh type and say, 'Look! They're all just out to get Hillary!' You'd point to the IG and say 'Look! We're just trying to clean up corruption here!' You're going to lose the fight over which brush to paint the crowd with. People should understand that while there is an issue of honest governance here, there are also people who would exploit the issue to destroy their enemies. You need at least 2 brushes here -- one for people interested in accountability and one for people interested in political domination.

 

What a huge load of bullsh!t. There aren't enough in the world.

 

Deny it all you want, but it's true. Obama apologists are some of the most blind followers I've ever seen in my life. We can only hope that he won't lure them down to South America and tell them to drink the punch because we know they would.

 

Is there anything relatable to him 'shooting a baby in the face on the White House lawn' were his supporters still supported him during his presidency or are you speaking out of your ass?

You made the claim. The onus is on you to prove your assertion.

 

Man, I'm pretty sure that none of that is going to happen.

 

Agreed. It's pretty naive to think that Obama would let any of that happen. If it starts going in that direction, he'll have it shut down. He's a Chicago guy, they didn't invent corruption, but they made it an art.

 

I'd rather be lost, than following nothing.

It's been 2 years of investigation. Hillary Clinton has not been charged with any crime, and I predict, she will not be charged with any crime.

 

You and I disagree on many issues, perhaps, but we are in total agreement on this bottom line.

I was reading an interview with Harrison Ford and he listed this as his biggest frustration with America. During his lifetime, as he put it, a business venture called "news" decided to separate us and anger us for profit, and we've lost a sense of collective ownership, collective aspiration for our kids and future.

If enough of us witness it and renounce it, maybe we can reverse things. I don't know, but I agree that arguing the partisan crap is worse than doing nothing.

 

this bit's pretty gross:

regardless of who you blame or what side you're on.

Either reject the request, with reasons, or provide. The deliberate delays render the eventual info less useful and add prohibitive costs to an industry that's already having too much trouble funding informed or meaningful discussion.

 

Not even remotely true, statements like the one you made are the kind of thing that convince me that you have ceded your opinions to pundits.

 

I've just watched people like you fall all over yourself trying to defend every single thing this administration does. It's pretty obvious that Obama people are cult-like in their following.

 

Wow, you type pretty well to be so very young -- congrats, young man!

Not sure how y'all categorize me, but I think the shrugging you see in some corners is from seeing this as de rigueur behavior from most every politician with a scandal since about 1970.

To my own credit, I wasn't hopping up and down about the Bush/Cheney refusals and mass shreddings either. I had similar shoulder shrugs then.

I love the dreams of transparency, and I have laughed at Obama's failed promises on that front, but it may be pipe dreams in an oligarchy as entrenched and complex as ours.

 

Bull effing ****. The only thing I defend is the truth, regardless of who it makes look good or bad. Again, you have allowed pundits to twist your mind and have swallowed every nugget of bullsh!t they fed you, without question or the slightest bit of critical thinking.

 

Okay, since you think I'm young, tell me what president has had a support base as ferocious and blind as this current president. Certainly not W, not Clinton, Not HW, maybe you could make a case for Reagan but I don't think it would be accurate, definitely not Carter, not Ford, not Nixon, not Johnson. Kennedy? I don't know, it was before my time.

 

LOL, I'm sure you think that. Vast right wing conspiracy right? You guys are awesome.

 

I don't want to undersell Clinton's supporters though, he got caught doing all sorts of illegal and corrupt things and he still had people sticking by him. That's some pretty loyal support. I still don't think it was on the level of the Obama people. The difference being that Obama brought in a group of supporters who really only care about his race, Obama's racist supporters are absolutely the most blind, ridiculous supporters that any president has had in a LONG time.

 

So worked up he had to quote himself.

 

When your standard view of Obama is full of biased hate toward the man, of course, factual view of Obama is viewed as blind.