The Editorial Board of the Washington Post seems Very Concerned over how Donald Trump can win the election, and here’s their response
AS THE 2016 presidential campaign draws to a close, Donald Trump is airing commercials that present him as a change agent who will shake up Washington. Not a mainstream politician, exactly, but nothing to be afraid of, either. This appeal seems to be having some success, as Mr. Trump pulls even with his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, in some national polls and surpasses her in likely voters’ judgment on who is more trustworthy.
Ultimately, though, this appeal can succeed only if voters succumb to last-minute distractions and ignore or forget Mr. Trump’s record. Allow us to offer a few reminders.
You didn’t think this was going to be a positive editorial, did you?
“If I decide to run for office, I’ll produce my tax returns, absolutely.â€
This lie is emblematic, for two reasons. First, Mr. Trump’s refusal to release his returns is an unprecedented sign of contempt for voters; every major-party nominee of the modern era has respected this basic norm of transparency.
Uh huh
- “I’ve never received nor sent any material that was marked classified”
- “At this point, what difference does it make?”
- “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. ” (blaming the video for the Benghazi attack in public while telling her daughter in private it was a terrorist attack)
Then
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. . . . They’re sending people who have lots of problems. . . . They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.â€
They often aren’t sending their best. The crime reports show this. Hillary, on the other hand, wants to bring in 10’s of thousands of people from the Middle East who cannot be vetted, won’t be vetted, and resettle them over the objections of US citizens. We’ve seen how well this has worked out in Europe.
“You’d be in jail.â€
American democracy survives the passions and animus stirred up every four years because its leaders always have accepted this rule: The loser acknowledges the winner, and the winner leaves the loser in peace. Mr. Trump disavows both sides of that time-tested formula.
She would be in jail if her name wasn’t Hillary Clinton. And the WPEB would cheer this if she was a Republican.
“I would bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.â€
Mr. Trump’s celebration of torture provides one answer to that question. His vow to kill the innocent relatives of suspected terrorists offers another. A commander in chief in the U.S. system has vast powers, often beyond the reach of Congress or the courts to check. Mr. Trump could in fact order the CIA to resume waterboarding suspects — and worse — to the immense discredit of the country.
Why such a concern over terrorists who would be happy to slit the throats of the members of the WPEB?
“I’ve always felt fine about Putin. I think he’s a strong leader, he’s a powerful leader.â€
Remember when Hillary trotted out her “reset button”? And called Bashar Assad a reformer? When she pledged support and said how great Mohamed Morsi was, a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization?
Some addition whining from the WPEB continues, till we get to the end
“Make America great again.â€
It is mystifying that so many Republicans, after criticizing Mr. Obama for eight years for showing insufficient pride in the United States, would attach themselves to someone who has such contempt for the country, its institutions and its values. U.S. generals have been “reduced to rubble,†the U.S. Army cannot fight, U.S. cities are “hell,†U.S. wealth has been “stripped†away by global interests, the electoral system is “one big, ugly lie.†To each of these disasters, Mr. Trump offers phony solutions (Mexico will pay to build a wall) or none at all. He has neither the interest nor the capacity to suggest actual policies.
Of course, he doesn’t have contempt. I dislike defending Trump, but, poll after poll show that people think the economy is not doing well. Really, though, this has nothing to do with anything the WPEB highlights, it’s the phrase itself: liberals hate America and all it stands for, and would like to tear it down.
We believe, as we have said, that Ms. Clinton is well-prepared to serve as president. But even voters who disagree — who believe that Ms. Clinton is unqualified or ethically distasteful — cannot realistically argue that she represents a danger to the republic.
Mr. Trump is such a danger. Only by forgetting or ignoring what he has told us could Americans decide otherwise.
Uh huh. A woman who put her convenience over national security. A woman who intentionally attempted to destroy women who credibly accused her husband of rape. A woman who used her position as Secretary of State as a means to enrich herself and her family through pay for play to her so-called charitable foundation, and used her charitable foundation to enrich herself while spending a whopping 6% on actual charity. She puts herself over country. That’s a danger.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Comey stated there was no evidence Clinton lied to the FBI. What specific lie did she tell to Congress?
OMG ZACH….did you not see Gowdys cross of Comey before congress….Comey literally said almost a dozen times that Hillary lied by the way he answered Gowdys questions.
Its people like you breast stroking in the cesspool that are gonna get people like TRUMP elected next tuesday.
Hillary Lied….People Died.
20 years for republicans……..Immunity for Democrats.
Five field offices including the IRS investigating HRC and her foundation and all these emails……
And yet you use lawyer speak to try and muddle the issues….
Its very simple dude……THE FBI INVESTIGATES CRIME….why are they investigating HRC???
Career investigators have poured over the evidence in detail and haven’t found reason to charge Clinton. In any case, we aren’t making the claim that Clinton is innocent. Rather, we are rejecting poorly supported claims about her guilt.
So Zach you agree she is guilty its just a matter of semantics your arguing?
Everyone that is anyone knows the FBI could not go forward with this case because the DOJ refused to indict….not because they did not have evidence…..that is apparent in the fact that 5 field offices continue to investigate HRC including the IRS…..
Zach makes a lawyer speak case for HRC based upon a false premise that because no indictment she is therefor innocent of any crimes…..then he says well she could be guilty but we dont like how your wording it…..
on and on it goes…..the ROPE A DOPE TILL TUESDAY……..so she can pardon a 100 people….Zachs probably one of them……lololol…..poor guy…sorry man….find a new career…go back to middletown usa and practice law before you become a parole or someone who had to be pardoned in order to stay out of jail.
That the FBI is investigating the possibility of criminal activity doesn’t mean criminal activity is, in fact, occurring. That is, unless you are an authoritarian who doesn’t believe that objective evidence is necessary. “Lock her up!”
Comey literally said, there was “no basis for concluding that she was untruthful with us.”
literal, completely true and accurate : not exaggerated.
No. We’re arguing that the claim that she is a criminal is unsubstantiated. While there are many reasonable criticisms of the Clintons, making stuff up is not one of them.
Why is the FBI devoting 5 field offices to investigate HRC? Is this not a massive waste of the tax payers money if they have no reasonable expectations of finding any wrong doing?
Both parties in Congress have requested (insisted) that the FBI try and conclude their investigation as quickly as possible.
Probably, but how do you know whether or not there is wrongdoing without investigating? It’s why the AGs are investigating the Trump “University” scam and the Trump “Foundation”.
Do you assume in every case that the police are right?
Then you admit that she should have faced administrative punishment for her actions?
Also, please tell us all why others who had done the same thing Clinton did and were no longer in the same job were prosecuted?
Of course, that statement was made before the discovery of the Weiner emails. Those emails show that Clinton deleted more than just her private correspondence, as well as showing that she had sent classified information to her daughter who was not in the State Department. She had previously claimed she never sent official email anywhere other than to qualified recipients.
She made the same claims to Congress.
Clinton lied. It’s another crime she committed.
Both parties in Congress have requested (insisted) that the FBI try and conclude their investigation as quickly as possible.
640,000 New emails…..QUICKLY…..ROPE A DOPE…to TUESDAY.
Why is the FBI devoting 5 field offices to the investigation of HRC if she did nothing wrong.
WHY DID THE DOJ GRANT IMMUNITY TO FIVE PEOPLE IF THEY DID NOTHING WRONG?
ROPE A DOPE TILL TUESDAY.
HRC IS BEING INVESTIGATED BY FIVE OFFICES AND THE IRS….but of course nothing is going on….she is completely innocent and those IMMUNITY DEALS….well we were just funnin ya….and that murdered DNC guy who leaked DNC emails…well that was just one of those things……
HRC leads a crime syndicate….pure and simple and Zach smooth talking legal speak is comical if it wasnt so sad that he is serious to try the ROPE A DOPE TILL TUESDAY……
And additionally ZACH says that the FBI and the DOJ works for his pleasure….
therefore by ZACHs own admission OBAMA is guilty of Obstruction of justice if his DOJ works for HIM and does his bidding…..and if they refuse to investigate a mounting hill of evidence….that has to come from Obama….and if thats the case then Obama is guilty of NIXONESQUE crimes.
You see the cesspool connection here? HRC is willing to even bring down Obama in her desperate defense of her criminal enterprise and Obama is a fool for playing her games……
He is hoping that HRC pulls out a win, but if she looses tuesday look for him to throw her completely under the bus and order a grand jury and special prosecutor to save his legacy…..After the crap Clinton threw at him and michelle I would be flabberghasted if he let his legacy be destroyed by the Clintons.
All you black people want to save Obama’s legacy which has made him one of the most popular presidents in modern times……Vote Trump cause if HRC wins…..she is gonna drag obama under with her and hes gonna end up testifying in court when all is said and done…and this will drag on for years……
Let him be the Beacon of light you want him to be….not the lifeguard of the cesspool that is D.C…..a place he promised to clean up.
Probably just retraining. Classified information is not supposed to be sent via email, dotgov or not; but as the lines are not always clearly drawn, there is always some leakage.
That is incorrect. The email was found on her server. There is nothing known about the contents of Weiner’s laptop. The email was retroactively classified as confidential, and apparently concerned climate change negotiations.
She testified that she “never received nor sent any material that was marked classified.” The email in question wasn’t marked classified, nor was it particularly sensitive.
It’s a fact of law.
There’s no evidence Obama has interfered in any way with the Clinton investigation.
There’s no evidence Obama has interfered in any way with the Clinton investigation.
But you said Comey is working for DOJ and the DOJ works for Obama and the DOJ refuses to open a grand jury invesitigation and in fact the Left is calling for Comeys removal because he dared continue to investigate the HRC MAFIA…..so if thats the case….then they are following Obama’s orders…right?
*****Republicans get 20 years for closing a Bridge….Democrats get Immunity and get to run for president.****
She testified that she “never received nor sent any material that was marked classified.†The email in question wasn’t marked classified, nor was it particularly sensitive.
That was a question Gowdy asked Comey….replied that is not true.
The problem is that although Clinton signed off on having received training on classified materials, she never did. And yes, her signing off is a violation of the law as it is a statement made under oath. You can’t “retrain” what was never trained to begin with.
This was not “leakage/.” This was planned and known by Clinton.
Sorry, you are wrong. The email is classified based on its content. It doesn’t need a stamp or designation to be classified. It is classified. That is something that every person who deals with classified information is supposed to know.
Secondly, the email was not found on the Clinton servers. It was found on the State Department servers. Which means that when Hillary said she had only deleted non-work related emails from her server, she lied again.
Her parsing of words takes in naive people like you. The email was classified by its content. That’s the law.
STOP LYING ZACH……..your bullshit is why this country is in the shape its in.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said “I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material.” That is true?
Comey: There was classified information emailed.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton used one device, was that true?
Comey: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said all work related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?
Comey: No. We found work related email, thousands, that were not returned.
Gowdy: Well, in the interest of time and because I have a plane to catch tomorrow afternoon, I’m not going to go through any more of the false statements but I am going to ask you to put on your old hat. Faults exculpatory statements are used for what?
Comey: Well, either for a substantive prosecution or evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.
Gowdy: Exactly. Intent and consciousness of guilt, right?
Comey: That is right?
stammer…stammer…stammer…..INTENT>>>INTENT>>>INTENT>>>WAS MET……COMEY LAID IT OUT FOR THEM QUITE CLEARLY….its obvious to everyone that the DOJ LED BY OBAMA THAT HE COULD NOT BRING A CASE BECAUSE OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE>
More Clinton lies and violation of agreements::
And…
Clinton is a pathological liar. She is incapable of telling the truth.
What I find astounding as I continue to research these polls is that 42 percent of America identifies as independents….and Trump in a poll is out polling HRC by 8-11 percent with INDIES….combine that with the GOP vote and he should easily be ahead nationally and yet he is always behind…..
Mathmatically this would give him a plus 4-5 lead….LIKE THE LA TIMES/USC POLL is showing right now…that was dead on in 2008-2012.
Yet poll after poll after poll nationally has trump down from 1-6 points. A sea of BLUE CLINTON with 3-6 percent still undecided.
Its no wonder the Brits got it wrong on Brexit…and internal polling has the Clinton campaign in full blown panic mode right now meaning when you bring in the Prez and Michelle and rock stars and hollywood types the last few days you know its bad…..this should be the time HRC is setting a concillatory tone not bashing trump as if he is Osama Bin Laden crossed with Hitler.
Even Michael Moore is saying he thinks Trump could win and Moore is pretty straight up with his facts even if he is kookish left.
Another thing the left is trying to blame on Trump is that the stock market will tank……and in fact that is happening…. A slow bleed…..the market has been down for a couple months now….
but one has to go back and look at what the FED said a couple months ago……..
WERE MOST LIKELY GOING TO RAISE INTEREST RATES IN DECEMBER…….this has people pulling money to sit it on the sidelines in anticipation of two things….putting it into cds/bonds and watching the dow fall 1500-2500 points before reinvesting it…..
It has nothing to do with the fact investors think Trump is a crazy loon who is going to bankrupt the stock market day one.
Also don’t forget that the new hourly wages for salaried people kick in in December as well.
Fact-checking organizations disagree with your partisan opinion.
There.
Fixed that for you.
While the FBI Director serves at the pleasure of the president, he is granted significant independence. Comey was given a congressional hearing, lauded for his independence, and garnered a bipartisan 93-1 approval. There is no evidence of undue influence by the President.
So gitarcarver’s statement was incorrect.
You really need to provide primary support for your statements. There are times when she didn’t sign the documents and may not have received the required training, but that is not what you are claiming.
Yet you provide no evidence of that, and it is contrary to the FBI’s findings. There are about 100 emails at issue, most of which were classified after the fact, most at the lowest level, and many concerning information that was otherwise publicly available.
If only life fit into nice little boxes. The government often classifies information that is publicly available, and much that is innocuous.
No. It shows she was wrong, not that she lied. She provided her attorneys her emails, and they made the disposition. The FBI found no evidence of ill-intent.
This doesn’t support your claim that “Comey literally said almost a dozen times that Hillary lied by the way he answered Gowdys questions.” Do you know what the word “literally” means?
The Foundation says that this was at previous levels of support, so was exempt from reporting.
This doesn’t support your claim that “Comey literally said almost a dozen times that Hillary lied by the way he answered Gowdys questions.†Do you know what the word “literally†means?
really? your resorting to the grammar nazi now to defend HRC? LOLOLOL….People of America…I present to you HRC defense council…I seem to remember Bill Clinton spending days trying to define a single word….LOLOLOLOLOLOL………..
Five people granted Immunity….2 republicans given 20 years for closing a bridge.
Keep up the ROPE A DOPE….I can battle you till Tuesday with facts while you try to double talk and use semantics to confuse anyone who might actually be reading this.
Its obvious the HRC camp is frantic with internal polling and you are too. But Im here till election day…to simply respond to your ever desperate attempts to discredit the truth.
No. We’re pointing to facts. Your claim is that Comey literally or specifically said that Clinton lied to Congress. He did not. He did suggest some of her statements were false.
More particularly, Clinton said that she never sent emails marked classified. While no emails she sent were properly marked, three had portion markings. Of these, two were incorrectly marked. That leaves one classified email she sent which while not properly marked did have portion markings. She also sent a number of emails which were retroactively marked classified, the vast majority of which were classified at the lowest level of classification. A few emails were, indeed, at higher levels of classification, but there is no reason to believe that this was anything more than an oversight on the part of her staff and of herself.
Even the slightest acquaintance with reality would really help you kids…Â
Comey specifically testified that he had not reviewed Clinton’s Congressional testimony, consequently, he did not take a position on Clinton’s veracity with Congress.
So “Duck and Cover” Donnie fled the stage yesterday when a REPUBLICAN held up a sign!
If Big Pussy Grabber can’t stand up to a peaceful protester how can you defeat ISIS?
How is it that a little guy who lies about serving in the Army gets to question the judgement of the Secret Service?
Soldier on, brave little guy.
Soldier on, little bitch.
Sorry.
The question should have been-
How is it that a gutless ignorant little guy who lied about serving in the Army get to question the actions and judgement of the Secret Service?
Soldier on, gutless little guy.
This doesn’t support your claim that “Comey literally said almost a dozen times that Hillary lied by the way he answered Gowdys questions.†Do you know what the word “literally†means?
ZACH I would fire you if you were my legal counsel….is this what they teach you in JR. college these days…..when there is nothing left to challenge bring out questioning the other sides usage of semantic.
Literally…….: in effect : virtually
Comey in effect virtually said that HRC LIED.
Better for you…..now go nitpick something else to try and defend HRC’s VERY PUBLIC STATEMENTS THAT SHE NEVER EMAILED CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO WHICH COMEY SAID>>>>>>>NOT TRUE.
Free speech?
The crowd beat up a sign-wielding protester, then someone shouted gun, so the Secret Service was correct to respond by protecting the candidate. It wasn’t Trump’s decision, so there’s nothing to criticize him about.
In fact, Comey explicitly refrained from stating an opinion on the subject because he had not reviewed Clinton’s Congressional testimony.
explicit, very clear and complete : leaving no doubt about the meaning
There was no doubt about the transcript.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said “I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material.†That is true?
Comey: There was classified information emailed.
HRC Lied under oath….Comey confirms it.
The statement you quoted is not from Clinton’s congressional testimony in October 2015, but apparently from a press conference in March 2015. She revised this statement to “marked classified” explaining that she relied on professionals in her department to mark documents classified as required.
God, you guys are so smart.
Might want to tell it to little jeffy… he seems confused.
The Pink Poodle typed:
And don’t you forget it!
Zachriel is literally correct, but it’s so much fun to mock you Cesspoolians. Does it upset you when someone unfairly criticizes Trump?
Clinton foundation paid for chelsea’s wedding…..
Hillary lies repeatedly….so now your just defending her lying…….
Clinton foundation collected 6 million from a foreign government and never reported it…….
At sometimes your house of cards is gonna crash on you ZACH….
But rope a dope till tuesday….power is all that matters….FUCK AMERICA AND THE TRUTH……POWER…is all that matters to the clintons and to democrats….
So much so that they burned Bernie Sanders and his followers to win the Democratic nomination….
LIES, LIES and More LIES…..
So if they did nothing wrong…..WHY THE IMMUNITY TO FIVE people????
Notably, instead of simply acknowledging your error, you change the subject.
I have made no error…you are arguing that she did not perjure herself….I am arguing that she committed crimes that have lessor people in prison…for example in possession of secret and top secret information on her own private server….additionally allowing her MAID to print classified material…..allowing people without clearance to have access to classified material…
You on the other hand are obsessed with my use of the word LITERALLY rather then answering my question…
HRC stated she did not email classified information……Comey said that was not true….classified emails WERE emailed…..
She is a pathological liar….IF NO CRIMES WERE COMMITTED>>>WHY THE IMMUNITY TO FIVE PEOPLE? Why did others respond with taking their fifth amendment rights…why did others just not show up at all for their appointment with congressional hearings?
You cited something Clinton said in a press conference to argue she lied to Congress.
Uh, no.
I just enjoy pointing out what a little lying weasel you are, little soldier guy, every chance I get…
You ever gonna man up and admit you lied about serving in the Army, little guy?
I know what I am claiming, sir. She signed off that she had received the training but had not.
Did I miss something here? Are you really trying to say that the private server set up by Clinton was not known to her and suddenly just appeared out of the blue?
And your point then is that classified material is somehow not classified?
Can’t argue with that lack of logic. I don’t even want to try.
And of course, you still didn’t address that fact that the information is classified based on its content, and not a stamp or designation on the email itself. That’s the law.
Try again. If she said she provided all the emails and didn’t that’s a lie.
BS.
Hillary signed an agreement with the State Department pledging that this type of thing would not happen while Secretary of State and yet it did.
It was not exempt from reporting and broke a legal and binding agreement.
Git,
Like arguing with kiddies at daycare…
Am I right?
Do you have evidence of that?
Email is not for classified information. It has nothing to do with whether it was a private server or a dotgov address. Some classified information always leaks into email. That’s a problem with procedures not keeping pace with technology.
The point is that some information that is considered classified it not particularly sensitive. Some information is classified that you can read in the newspaper, such as drone attacks.
Yes, that’s correct. But because there are many gray zones, some things which seem innocuous may end up retroactively classified, such as a discussion of drone attacks as reported in the newspapers.
Not necessarily. Lying requires a different level of proof than simply being wrong.