Under the bus

F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/22/politics/colin-powell-rejects-clinton-email-defense/

Colin Powell is pushing back on reports suggesting that he might have given Hillary Clinton the idea to use a private email account as Secretary of State, telling media outlets that "her people are trying to pin it on me."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/colin-powell-blasts-hillary-clintons-team-pin-private/story?id=41570285

"The truth is, she was using [the private email server] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did," Powell told the magazine.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/22/why-colin-powell-is-a-bad-enemy-for-hillary-clinton-to-make/

Powell is not an enemy Clinton needs or wants — but she may have turned the former secretary of state into one with her seeming attempt to use him as a shield against any wrongdoing in the eyes of the FBI.
 
astronautrob

astronautrob

Well-Known Member
Does it really matter WHO she "learned" it from? I think this line of thinking overshadows the fact that she actually did the crime. I mean who cares who she learned it from, the fact is she was dumb enough to do it and get caught. This story is irrelevant, and honestly the only relevant thing is whether or not Powell is going to become an actual enemy of Clinton or if this is all for show

It's just another thing for people to talk about while we are forced to choose between probably two of the worst presidential candidates in the history of this fake democracy
 
rkymtnman

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
astronautrob said:
Does it really matter WHO she "learned" it from? I think this line of thinking overshadows the fact that she actually did the crime. I mean who cares who she learned it from, the fact is she was dumb enough to do it and get caught. This story is irrelevant, and honestly the only relevant thing is whether or not Powell is going to become an actual enemy of Clinton or if this is all for show

It's just another thing for people to talk about while we are forced to choose between probably two of the worst presidential candidates in the history of this fake democracy
Click to expand...
bush and cheney not charged with crimes. clinton not charged with crimes. see the pattern? there is no criminality.

the only way to get a woman elected Pres was to run the worst possible person against her= Trumpf
 
astronautrob

astronautrob

Well-Known Member
rkymtnman said:
bush and cheney not charged with crimes. clinton not charged with crimes. see the pattern? there is no criminality.

the only way to get a woman elected Pres was to run the worst possible person against her= Trumpf
Click to expand...
Just because people aren't charged with a crime doesn't mean it's not criminal, that's a distorted way of looking at things

Although I agree with the latter statement fully. Had a person come to my door yesterday who I guess was supporting Clinton but her only line of argument as to why she was supporting Clinton was so that Trump wouldn't get elected.....seems backwards to me but I guess it's the world we live in today
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
astronautrob said:
Just because people aren't charged with a crime doesn't mean it's not criminal, that's a distorted way of looking at things

Although I agree with the latter statement fully. Had a person come to my door yesterday who I guess was supporting Clinton but her only line of argument as to why she was supporting Clinton was so that Trump wouldn't get elected.....seems backwards to me but I guess it's the world we live in today
Click to expand...
So who's the alternative?
 
astronautrob

astronautrob

Well-Known Member
rkymtnman said:
if it was criminal, why wasn't she charged?
Click to expand...
I think you can answer this yourself, come on now.
rkymtnman said:
there should be but there aren't. welcome to Amerika. did you just get here or something?
Click to expand...
No. Also, that doesn't negate the fact that there shouldn't be only one alternative. You can basically make the same argument for anything that is wrong with anything though. Yes things aren't that way but does that mean we should all just keep playing along? If all just keep saying "Oh well yea things shouldn't be this way but they are so shut up about it", nothing is ever going to change.
 
astronautrob

astronautrob

Well-Known Member
Things are this way for the most part because of changes made in the 90's, so it really hasn't even been that long since things have "been this way". If those rules weren't rigged in the 90's to make it so only the two candidates from the two major parties get it, we'd at least probably have a third party person in the debates this year. Saying that things are the way the are is a cop out and is generated by fear
 
rkymtnman

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
astronautrob said:
I think you can answer this yourself, come on now.

No. Also, that doesn't negate the fact that there shouldn't be only one alternative. You can basically make the same argument for anything that is wrong with anything though. Yes things aren't that way but does that mean we should all just keep playing along? If all just keep saying "Oh well yea things shouldn't be this way but they are so shut up about it", nothing is ever going to change.
Click to expand...
i agree with you. how and where do you come up with a third party that can get 50 or so million votes though?

perot was the only one that i can recall that got a decent amount of support but still came up way short.

most of these politicians are groomed for many, many years to become Presidential.

here's soemthing to ponder:

don't you think it's weird (not a coincidence) that both candidates obama and mittens BOTH supported the ACA? so no matter who won, the powers that be got the wish of nationalized healthcare system (at least the start of)
 
rkymtnman

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
So her trying to "pin it on Powell" just goes unnoticed by y'all?

Yet again, she lies.

Nothing to see here. Just give her your vote.
Click to expand...
trump was a Democrat just 10 years ago. so he lies. nothing to see here.. just an orange oranguatan who wants the nuke codes
 
rkymtnman

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
trump said hillary was a great SOS. so he lies again. and again. til death do us part wife one and two. he lies.
 
astronautrob

astronautrob

Well-Known Member
rkymtnman said:
i agree with you. how and where do you come up with a third party that can get 50 or so million votes though?

perot was the only one that i can recall that got a decent amount of support but still came up way short.

most of these politicians are groomed for many, many years to become Presidential.

here's soemthing to ponder:

don't you think it's weird (not a coincidence) that both candidates obama and mittens BOTH supported the ACA? so no matter who won, the powers that be got the wish of nationalized healthcare system (at least the start of)
Click to expand...
Well I didn't necessarily say that they would win, I just said that there would be a third party person in the debates (probably).

But I do ponder that, and I don't think it's weird. A lot of people don't realize (you don't seem to be one of those people luckily), that if you look at issues like economics, trade agreements, military spending, military action, etc., basically anything that isn't a polarized "hot topic" issue, republicans and democrats vote almost identical. That's because they work for the same people. I think that's the same thing you were saying there though.
 
rkymtnman

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
astronautrob said:
Well I didn't necessarily say that they would win, I just said that there would be a third party person in the debates (probably).

But I do ponder that, and I don't think it's weird. A lot of people don't realize (you don't seem to be one of those people luckily), that if you look at issues like economics, trade agreements, military spending, military action, etc., basically anything that isn't a polarized "hot topic" issue, republicans and democrats vote almost identical. That's because they work for the same people. I think that's the same thing you were saying there though.
Click to expand...
exactly. we're going down a direction that is pre-determined and this whole dem v repub is just a smoke and mirrors show while the ship keeps sailing onwards.

bush gave us Patriot act. obama gave us ACA. clinton is gonna be some type of massive weapons/ammo/magazine ban (my guess).
 
astronautrob

astronautrob

Well-Known Member
rkymtnman said:
exactly. we're going down a direction that is pre-determined and this whole dem v repub is just a smoke and mirrors show while the ship keeps sailing onwards.

bush gave us Patriot act. obama gave us ACA. clinton is gonna be some type of massive weapons/ammo/magazine ban (my guess).
Click to expand...
Firstly, I'd like to say that you're one of the first people I've actually been able to have an intelligent conversation about politics with, so I want to thank you for that off the top.

Yes to all of it though. I agree that something BIG-ish is going to happen under Clinton, the framework has already been put in place by Bush and Obama, among others. I hope it's something not as massive as both of us think but I don't have a lot of hope on that front. It seems like at least they want to keep the machine going, which means no HUGE disruptions, but I think that Clinton is the one of the last pieces to a bigger puzzle they've been setting up for years.

*edit: a question for you my friend. Do you think there is anything that will derail this plan? I know that's kind of a loaded question, but I feel like there have been kinks in the armor (so to speak) the more technology pervades our lives. That's really the only hope I have, just wanted to see if you had any other answers for that question
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top