The Three Ironies of Trump

double-standards-illo

Trump has been talking about Bill Clinton’s infidelities and his alleged predation of women since the start of his campaign.

After his poor showing in the first debate, he brought it up again. He promised to respond to Clinton’s use of a former Miss Universe with a no-holds-barred expose on Bill Clinton’s history.

Then the famous “lewd” tape broke which caused him to double-down on his attack on Hillary in an effort to deflect attention away from his outrageous statements.

Prior to the debate, Trump had a Facebook live event featuring three women who claimed they had been assaulted, or in one case raped, by Bill Clinton. There was also a fourth woman who blamed Hillary for defending the man who raped her when she was 12.

Trump made a big deal of the treatment that these women had received from the Clinton’s in particular and the media in general.

At the debate, Trump said that his claims of sexual assault was just talk. He said had never assaulted anyone. That wasn’t the best answer because it simply invited women to report their past experiences with Trump. This past week we’ve seen the count of women reporting Trump assaults rise to 10. The famous Hollywood feminist attorney, Gloria Allred, is now involved. She issued a public offer to take the cases of any other women who were victims of Trump’s assaults. We can probably expect the list of assault claims to grow daily pretty much up through the election.

Fact-Check Fatigue
Trump has said he was going to publicize information which would support his claims of innocence. But the sheer number of women coming forward is going to make it difficult for his “fact checking” to keep up. The first irony is that at least in this case, Trump is suffering from the same fact-check fatigue that has been a basic part of his strategy. The sheer volume of his lies has made it difficult for the fact-checkers and the public to keep up. Now he is faced with exactly the same challenge.

The Real Bill Cosby
Trump’s campaign manager predicted they were going to turn Bill Clinton into Bill Cosby. They were successful in attracting the attention of the attorney who helped make the case against Bill Cosby. The second irony is that Gloria Allred plans to make her case against Donald Trump.

The Real Donald Trump
The final irony is Trump’s response his accusers.

He attacked them with fury and intensity.

These vicious claims about me of inappropriate conduct with women are totally and absolutely false. … They’re pure fiction, and they’re outright lies. These events never, ever happened and the people said them meekly, fully understand. You take a look at these people, you study these people, and you’ll understand also. The claims are preposterous, ludicrous and defy truth, common sense and logic. We already have substantial evidence to dispute these lies, and it will be made public in an appropriate way and at an appropriate time very soon. …

Last night we hear that after 12 years — this took place 12 years ago, this story — a new claim that I made inappropriate advances during the interview to this writer [Stoynoff, reporting for People magazine] and I asked a very simple question: Why wasn’t it part of the story that appeared 12 years ago? … These people are horrible people. They’re horrible, horrible liars. And interestingly, it happens to appear 26 days before our very important election, isn’t that amazing?

On the other hand, here’s how Trump described his rescue of the women who accused Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton’s accusers “have been trying to get their feelings out for so long, and the media wouldn’t take it. One thing with me, the media takes it. Whatever. So they were able to get what they wanted to get out. To quote Juanita Broaddrick, ‘Hillary Clinton threatened me after Bill Clinton raped me.’ She’s been struggling to get the media to pay attention to her for many, many years. So last night, I decided we would expose the hypocrisy of the Clintons and the media and our politicians to the entire world.”

And from the Wash Post.

For most of this past week, Trump advocated for accusers of Bill Clinton. He said it was “very beautiful and very sad” to hear their stories. He blamed Hillary Clinton for attacking the women and discrediting them — even though her criticism was directed toward the “vast right-wing conspiracy” by Republicans, whom she said started rumors about Lewinsky, rather than against Lewinsky herself. He made no reference to how the allegations were made in the 1990s, or that some of the alleged attacks date as far back as four decades — and that the women waited years to make their claims.

This past week, Trump faced exactly the same situation that Bill and Hillary faced in 1998. Women from years ago started making embarrassing claims about past behavior and directly contradicting his public claim that he had not engaged in the behavior he had described on tape.

How did Trump react?

Similar to Hillary Clinton, he blamed a vast left wing conspiracy. That conspiracy included the “Clinton machine”, the New York Times, and the Mexican telecommunications billionaire Carlos Slim who happens to have an investment in the New York Times. He said “Hillary Clinton meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special-interest friends and her donors.”

Unlike Clinton, he attacked the media for printing these claims. This is the same media that he had previously attacked for NOT giving the Clinton accusers sufficient attention.

Unlike Clinton, he personally and publicly attacked the honesty of all of his accusers calling them “horrible, horrible liars”.

Unlike Clinton, he threatened legal action.

Unlike Clinton, he suggested that some of these women were lying because they weren’t sufficiently attractive for him to consider assaulting them.

Unlike Clinton, he questioned why these women had not come forward sooner.

The answer to the last question is obvious. Why would any woman want to subject herself to this sort of public abuse after already being the victim of such private assault? The reason, over and over again, that these women have shared for overcoming their fear is that Trump’s denial on national TV was the last straw.

It should also be the last straw for any thoughtful person. Whether these women are telling the truth or not does not justify the treatment that they received. This behavior is NOT NORMAL. It is not acceptable. This is not the sort of behavior that gets rewarded with a trip to the White House. This is the sort of behavior that must be repudiated in a dramatic and public way. Trump’s loss must be a bold and bright warning to every person who even considers sexual assault.

Sexual assault is not acceptable under any circumstances. Not at home. Not at work. Not at the bar. Not on an airplane. Nowhere. Never.

Shaming the victim is also not acceptable. We have an innocent until proven guilty legal system, but proof in the court of public opinion should not fall on the victim.

This now becomes another test for those who contemplate a public career. They have to make sure that aren’t women in their past. If there are, they must first make it right before asking for anyone else’s vote.

If that’s what comes of this election. If that is the lasting legacy of electing the first woman president. If this is the reward the nation receives in return for enduring Trump’s candidacy, then maybe it was worth it.

34 Responses to “The Three Ironies of Trump”

  1. Keith says:

    Wow….

    Unlike the Clinton’s, these are years and years after the fact. The Clinton’s Settled with Paula Jones for $900k (?)

    Also, this one didn’t happen. The news gal. It WOUlD have been part of the story and Trumps Butler says. “Didn’t happen”

    I’m encouraging you to write a glowing piece in Hillary.

  2. Keith says:

    A friend wrote this just now and sent it along.

    I had lunch with my church’s Pastor of missions today who happens to be from India!! Where, I know now, after recently visiting my co-worker and friend Suresh and his precious family, is an amazing place!! While we truly enjoyed each other’s company and spending the time together the discussion of Politics came up. I like many have been totally dismayed with our choices on one hand you have Trump who tells it like it is as disgusting as it can get, not PC, what you see is what you get and what you get isn’t very appealing and Hillary Clinton a polished politician who is skillful at rehearsed rhetoric, telling her audience what they want to hear, who’s best attribute seems to be plausible denial. As we discussed the thought of how Jesus handled different kinds of sins came up by way of Mary of Magdalene (the prostitute) and the Sadducee’s and Pharisees. He addressed Mary’s sexual sin with compassion and mercy and the Sadducee’s and Pharisees sin of hypocrisy with strong rebukes and woes.
    Food for thought!!

  3. Jeff Beamsley says:

    Might want to go back and read those bible stories a little more closely there big fella.

    It wasn’t the sins that were the big deal. Jesus forgave all kinds of sins. Jesus even forgave adultery. A woman caught in the very act who under Jewish law at the time should have been stoned to death by the men of her village.

    No, it wasn’t the sin that was important, it was the forgiveness. Specifically, the Magdalene sought forgiveness. She repented. She washed Jesus feet with her tears. The Pharisees ostracized the Magdalene because she was a prostitute. They also questioned Jesus because he even allowed her to touch him. The Pharisees where dealing with “appearance of conflict” to accuse Jesus of consorting with a prostitute because he didn’t immediately reject her approach. But Jesus knew that she was sincere in her petition, he didn’t care about how her touch looked to the Pharisees. He knew that this traditional foot washing that was likely one of the services she had performed for pay, was in this case a demonstration of her deep and pure devotion to the man she recognized as her Messiah. Both of them transformed this ceremony into a holy act. He forgave her and she became one of his most devoted disciples.

    Jesus condemned the Pharisees and Sadducee for their hypocrisy, hard hardheartedness, and obsession with the letter of the law while losing sight of the spirit of the law. IMHO, this is a fundamental weakness of conservatism where people are considered guilty until proven innocent.

    Trump doesn’t seek forgiveness. He doesn’t apologize for the injury he may have caused by his actions. He doesn’t admit when he is wrong.

    Clinton, on the other hand, has apologized for her use of a private email server, but you refuse to forgive her. She has been investigated multiple times and cleared of any wrong doing regarding her treatment of Clinton’s accusers, her involvement in past financial scandals, her relationship with her family foundation while Secretary of State, her actions during the Benghazi attacks, and her use of a private email server. Yet you continue to claim that she is guilty and untrustworthy.

    Perhaps you should read these stories a little more closely too and consider how your own particular biases may be affecting your ability to love others as Jesus did.

  4. Keith says:

    Perfect example of bias.

    First, the way my friend present the two stories is exactly as you did. Why do you think it is present wrong? Read theast two sentences of his comment again. Did you even get that far. In the second to last sentence he says exactly what you have in many.

    However, flip your summary to Clinton is a “practiced Pharisee” and Trump the woman caught in adultery. I am NOT standing in judgement of Hillary. Do not get that wrong. Bias sees through their own set of glasses.

    For the record Jeff, Hillary lead the “bimbo eruption team.” This is not what the women caught at the well did.

    Again no comments on Wiki leaks?

  5. Keith says:

    I think I need to clearify my last response.

    You read my friends post and assumed what is thoughts were.
    Jeff there is no indication of whom is whom in his post. You made the assumption then determined who was the women at the well and who was the Pharisee. I was pointing out your bias on a non biased posting.

    In my response I was merely saying it could be flipped from how you viewed it. So, your bias on unbiased things is just that, biased. This is a perfect reflection of the mainstream media. They do their best to remain unbiased, that’s a stretch, but their reporting and news is from a mostly liberal perspective. It can’t help but to be biased just as you demonstrates bias so easily and quickly above. Hope this helps in your understanding of bias.

    Ask yourself this one question. Nearly every NYT article on Trump is negative. If the polls were reversed would the times be writing negative Hillary stories or would they be writing stories about how and what she needs to do to win in the next two weeks?

    The other day I read Bloomberg on line. 9 lead articles about trump. All nine, IN THE TITLE, were negative. When was the last positive story you’ve seen of Trump you’ve seen in NYT, Wash Post or CSM or and “mainstream” organization? NBC CBS CNN ABC?

    Your bias simply will not allow you to see clearly.

    Wiki leaks???? mean anything? People are getting fired. Must be some truth there.

  6. Keith says:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/democratic-national-committee-operatives-step-aside-after-release-of-videos-1476919228?mod=e2fb

    In case you’re not following.

    People “set aside”

    Where’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz anyway?

  7. Jeff Beamsley says:

    As we discussed the thought of how Jesus handled different kinds of sins came up by way of Mary of Magdalene (the prostitute) and the Sadducee’s and Pharisees. He addressed Mary’s sexual sin with compassion and mercy and the Sadducee’s and Pharisees sin of hypocrisy with strong rebukes and woes.
    Food for thought!!

    There isn’t any bias in my response.

    The core of the both stories regardless of how you apply them is repentance and forgiveness.

    The Pharisees were unrepentant and as a result received merited rebuke. The Magdalene WAS repentant and as a result received full pardon, though her sins were many.

    If you apply this to the current choice of candidates, I agree that they are both sinners, as are we all. But there is one who has repented and admitted her mistakes. There is the other who has been singularly unrepentant. All I suggested is that you should consider following Jesus example and forgive the repentant and stop making excuses for the unrepentant.

    If you feel somehow that this is either inaccurate, or inappropriate, please let me know where I may have failed. 🙂

  8. Jeff Beamsley says:

    http://www.breakingchristiannews.com/articles/display_art.html?ID=19505

    Doesn’t really matter. The law says that a woman has a right to an abortion up to the point where the fetus can survive outside the womb. That is currently defined at 24-26 weeks. There is no data suggesting c-sections before 24 weeks have a 95% success rate. The number of babies that survive before 24 weeks is small and they generally have serious physical problems.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability

    Just as I don’t believe that there is any opportunity to roll back Roe, I also don’t believe that there is any opportunity to provide women the choice to terminate their pregnancy after 24-26 weeks (depending on the state).

    Just 1.3% of abortions performed between the 21st and 24-26 week of pregnancy. After that, if there are health problems with the fetus and or the mother, generally labor is induced or a c-section is performed. If there are health problems with the fetus, generally the newborn baby does not survive.

    Clinton chose not to get into a “legal” argument with Trump. Instead she simply supported a woman’s EXISTING right to an abortion. Trump invented some specter of 9 month abortions which is both illegal and also just doesn’t happen in this country.

  9. Keith says:

    Again I’m not saying who is Mary and who is the Pharisee. However, you did. You bias lead you to choose who was who.

    I’d be curious to know when Hillary asked for forgiveness. She has said she made mistakes but I don’t recall her asking for forgiveness. Example – she said using her email was a mistake. However, she purposely lied about it and continues to until this day.

  10. Jeff Beamsley says:

    Again I’m not saying who is Mary and who is the Pharisee. However, you did. You bias lead you to choose who was who.

    Again it wasn’t bias as you claim. It was obvious. One asked forgiveness and the other didn’t.

    I’d be curious to know when Hillary asked for forgiveness. She has said she made mistakes but I don’t recall her asking for forgiveness. Example – she said using her email was a mistake. However, she purposely lied about it and continues to until this day.

    This is interesting.

    Rather than go look yourself, you displayed either hardness of heart of hardness of head by saying that you “don’t recall her asking for forgiveness”. She did – multiple times.

    They are easy to find, but I’ll leave that to you for your penance if you distrust me too. 🙂

    BTW, your claims that she continues to lie are also uncharitable and inaccurate. Neither the fact checkers or the FBI are as biased about this as you are.

    So I suggest that you again think about the real meaning of the bible stories that we are discussing. Jesus only witheld forgiveness for the self-righteous who lacked humility and mercy. That appears to be an accurate description of Trump. It should not also be an accurate description of you unless you continue to insist that Clinton is unworthy of forgiveness.

    The be clear, Trump has issued a vague apology where he did use the word “sorry” for the “lewd” video and said doesn’t represent his views. But then when women stepped forward to challenge his claim that it was just talk, he treated them in much the same way he talked about women on the video.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/politics/donald-trump-apology.html?_r=0

    The only other time in August, he used the word “regret” but he never said he was sorry or specifically identified what it was that he even regretted.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-apologizes-words-campaign-trail-lie/story?id=41496030

    So here’s the deal.

    You forgive Hillary for all of the things for which she has requested forgiveness (email, “despicables”, and coal comments) and I will forgive Donald for his “lewd” video comments.

    What that means is that you can’t call Hillary a liar for any of those things and I can’t call Trump a liar when he said he didn’t do the things that he talked about on his video.

    Let’s see if you are really ready to forgive.

  11. Jeff Beamsley says:

    http://observer.com/2016/10/no-consequences-from-media-peers-for-reporters-caught-colluding-with-hillary/

    Not a particularly good day for journalism, but then Politico wasn’t on my list of reliable sites anyway. What I find particularly interesting is the RW site that are particularly put out by the whole thing have long since abandoned the principles of journalistic ethics in order to push their own political agendas.

    That’s why it hasn’t received much play in mainstream media.

    It’s not news. This sort of stuff and worse happens every day.

  12. Jeff Beamsley says:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23/new-podesta-email-exposes-dem-playbook-rigging-polls-through-oversamples

    Anything to this? The Wash Post???

    No.

    RCP, FiveThirtyEight, and Upshot all correct their poll of polls based on the bias that any individual poll reflects.

    Trump is losing.

    There is no silent majority lurking out there to save him.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-silent-majority-is-just-marketing-noise/2016/03/25/1be00fca-f282-11e5-a61f-e9c95c06edca_story.html?utm_term=.fe8b38dee9bf

    The only question at this point is how big his loss will be. There just isn’t enough time to turn things around and he doesn’t have the ground game. He doesn’t have a ground game because he outsourced it to the RNC and then proceeded to alienate the RNC.

    http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2016-10-14/donald-trump-abandons-the-ground-game

    The result is that the Dems will also win the Senate. Which means for the next two years they will be able to appoint the SCOTUS judges that they need.

  13. Jeff Beamsley says:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/democratic-national-committee-operatives-step-aside-after-release-of-videos-1476919228?mod=e2fb

    In case you’re not following.

    People “set aside”

    Where’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz anyway?

    These folks stepped over the line and were fired. Not sure what the big deal is. There will be those who will attempt to locate some smoking gun. If there is one, then whomever else is also responsible should also be held accountable.

    DWS is running for re-election in Florida. She won her primary and appears to be heading back to Washington.

  14. Keith says:

    Jeff,
    Let’s return to reality. You’ve written only negative things about trump. No posts about Hillary. You say Trump is unapologetic. He did apologies about the tape. You say Hillary has. Both have things neither has apologies for. Hillary DID lie about her server. Comely held a public whipping of her. So stop with the she didn’t lie. She only said using it was a mistake. She never apologize for lying. It’s you who are judging on over the other. If this were a political blog I’d say fine. It’s not. You use the word Christian.

    http://freebeacon.com/issues/cbs-anchors-bewildered-obamacare-percent-premium-hikes-happened/

    On to other things. The bewilderment of the CBS female in this video is priceless.

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_OVERHAUL_PREMIUMS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-10-24-17-03-27

    Falling apart Jeff, Hillary and single payer to the rescue.

  15. Jeff Beamsley says:

    Let’s return to reality. You’ve written only negative things about trump. No posts about Hillary.

    I offered to write a post comparing their policies with the caveat that we only talk about policies and not personalities. You rejected that offer.

    I offered to forgive Trump if you would forgive Clinton. You appear to have rejected that offer too.

    I have said NUMEROUS times that this blog is for my own enjoyment. I write about the things that interest me. I have said that both candidates are flawed. But Trump, in my opinion, is uniquely unqualified for the office to such a degree that it has dominated my thought.

    Also Trump exposes some remarkable weaknesses in conservative thought that I’m still working through. Here’s a guy who has completely trashed the pillars of the conservative movement – small government, fiscal responsibility, tribal unity, and social conservatism. Yet here he is leading the party off the proverbial cliff.

    As a result, there are still a lot of much more interesting things to write about regarding this whole phenomena before we get to Clinton.

    You say Trump is unapologetic. He did apologies about the tape.

    I included a link to an article about his apology for the tape. He did say that he was sorry. He also said that it didn’t represent his views. Then he continued to criticize women who came forward to disprove his claim that “it was just talk”, using the same methods that he apologized for.

    Even with this, however, I was prepared to forgive him, if you were willing to forgive Hillary. Apparently you are not.

    You say Hillary has. Both have things neither has apologies for. Hillary DID lie about her server. Comely held a public whipping of her. So stop with the she didn’t lie. She only said using it was a mistake. She never apologize for lying.

    She has said she was sorry. Not just what I said. I suggest you look it up of you don’t believe me. You are the one who is having a difficult time forgiving her. I’ve asked that you follow Jesus steps. Jesus was willing to accept the repentance of the Magdalene without even talking to her. His actions were a rebuke of the hardhearted self-righteousness of the Pharisees who were asking the same sorts of questions that you are asking. This is something YOU need to decide, not me or Hillary or Trump. Are you going to behave like Jesus and forgive those who seek forgiveness, or are you going to be like Simon who was so invested in the letter of the law that he lost track of the spirit?

    And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven. And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also? And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace. Luke 7:44-50

  16. Keith says:

    You’re getting very carried away. I have nothing to give Hillary forgiveness for….She did not sin against me. That’s between her and God. I do not judge her. I have nothing to forgive her for!!!!

    I’m not writing blogs pointing out her weaknesses. I am not obsessing over her presidency. You are. I’m only wiring in response to your admitted on domination of your thoughts. So much so that your standard for one does not apply to the other.

    Let me say again. Hillary will win I think. I hope not. If she does the sun will rise in the east, not the west. If Trump wins the same will be true. There is nothing to dominate your thoughts Jeff. Regardless who wins it has nothing to do with our salvation. God is still Lord of all and our home is still in Heaven. Nothing changes.

  17. Jeff Beamsley says:

    You’re getting very carried away. I have nothing to give Hillary forgiveness for….She did not sin against me. That’s between her and God. I do not judge her. I have nothing to forgive her for!!!!

    When you accuse her of lying and worse, you are judging her. I’m holding you accountable for your actions because I care about you. With regard to forgiveness, the Magdalene hadn’t done anything TO Jesus either, yet he forgave her.

    IMHO, you don’t have to be personally injured to forgive someone. Instead what you are affirming is that they are indeed made in the image and likeness of God.

    Clearly it is your decision, but my own personal decision is that I am going to forgive Trump and Clinton for their weaknesses and not speak of them anymore. Trump may take policy positions that I disagree with (e.g. threatening to refuse to accept the results of the election), but I’m not going to talk about any of his personal issues anymore. Clinton will likely be the President and I have high hopes for her success, but I’m not going to deal with her past issues with transparency or truthfulness. They are both children of God, just like us.

  18. Jeff Beamsley says:

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/us/obamacare-affordable-care-act-tax-penalties.html?_r=0&referer=

    Yes there are issues with the ACA.

    The basic issue isn’t that the penalty isn’t large enough to encourage young people to sign up, though that is an issue.

    The two big issues are:

    1. There aren’t enough healthy people in the exchanges to offset the costs for the sicker people who have signed up.
    2. Healthcare costs continue to rise. The rate has slowed, but it hasn’t slowed enough to prevent rate hikes.

    The big reason for #1 is that small business continues to offer employees insurance even though they aren’t required to. Working people are generally healthier than those that aren’t working. So this is another cohort of healthy people that are in the employer pool rather than the private self-insured pool.

    There are a number of legislative solutions which can help stabilize the exchanges as well as provide competition in smaller markets where there may not be a big enough pool to attract multiple competitors.

    The big reason for #2 are rising pharma costs. Rising costs of medication is a political problem and an example of how special interests with a lot of money are able to warp our markets to benefit the wealthy.

    Drug makers charge high prices for drugs thanks largely to “market exclusivity” regulations intended to allow them to recoup the research and development costs for new breakthrough medications, said senior author Ameet Sarpatwari. He’s an instructor at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston.

    The companies can do this largely unopposed because the nation’s largest health insurers — Medicare and Medicaid — aren’t allowed to negotiate prices, he added.

    Between 2013 and 2015, net spending on prescription drug prices increased about 20 percent in the United States, outstripping a forecast 11 percent increase on all health care costs​ combined, the authors said in background notes.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/whats-behind-the-sharp-rise-in-prescription-drug-prices/

    If the new administration were able to do one thing, allowing the government to negotiate best pricing with the pharma companies would be it.

    There are A LOT of good ideas out there from both sides of the aisle. Hopefully Republicans will finally be able to move beyond “repeal and replace” and we can begin a robust debate on “improve”.

  19. Keith says:

    The answer as it has been all along is single payer. ACA started it.

    I hold nothing against Hillary. i have compassion on grace for her. I have only brought her up because of your lopsided coverage of Trumps problems. I will not bring it up.

    So today’s email dump displays the new Clinton advisors being discussed by the old Clinton gaurd and the “way Clinton’s do business.” Read them.

  20. Keith says:

    https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/us/politics/bill-hillary-clinton-foundation-wikileaks.amp.html?client=safari

    Ijust saw CNN of all people discussing this. Gloria Boarger of all people, was commenting. “Is this what we’re going to get for the next four years in the White House. It kinda reminds you of he 90’s.” Read into that, and it’s fair to say her intent, NO THANKS. Well duuuuuh. Who do the champion of the Clinton’s think they’re getting. They’re 69 years old. You’re getting what you’re getting. The CLINTON’s!!!

  21. Jeff Beamsley says:

    The answer as it has been all along is single payer. ACA started it.

    I agree that single payer would certainly simplify things, but I’m not sure there are enough votes in the House to pass a single payor bill.

    So today’s email dump displays the new Clinton advisors being discussed by the old Clinton gaurd and the “way Clinton’s do business.” Read them.

    I have read the ones that have made it into the news.

    It is the ugly side of the way that big money plays in this country these days. As far as I can see, nothing illegal has occurred. Also there is no indication that connects the Bill’s consulting or Hillary’s speaking to any government influence.

    You can bet, however, that if the Republicans retain a majority in the House, that there will be plenty of public money spent looking for come evidence of influence peddling.

  22. Keith says:

    But they have shown influence peddling.

    ACA beaks the healthcare system. We certainly aren’t going backwards. It will not be repealed unless replaced. The only way it will be replaced is “more cheaper healthcare” which will be single payer. It was the intent all along. Go check my remarks from 2009 or 2010 and you’ll see I called that back then. The ACA was/is doomed to fail and my sinical side says it was created to do just that!!!

  23. Keith says:

    And on que Mr Comey reappears.

  24. Keith says:

    Jeff,
    I now have a new “top moment” of the 2016 campaign. Hillary is demanding the FBI immediately make public all the emails it has. Surely you can join me in the irony of that.

    On a serious note. This close to the election if he doesn’t have something that is a super nuclear bombshell, and he’s gone public like this, he needs to be removed from his job at minimum.

  25. Jeff Beamsley says:

    But they have shown influence peddling.

    I should have been more precise in using the term “influence peddling”. While there are certainly ethical issues in the “Bill Clinton Inc.” business model, it isn’t illegal. What IS illegal is if individuals or governments were able to somehow change government policy as a result of the influence that they were buying from a non-government person OR if a person employed by the government offered to change some policy in exchange for money.

    This problem is not unique to the Clinton’s. This is the “soft” corruption that Lawrence Lessig talks about in his Republic Lost book. I can contribute to the campaign fund of a legislator because they support a particular issue that I care about. That isn’t illegal. I can also hire someone who is no longer employed by the government but is now a private citizen to advocate my view among people that they know in government as a result of their service. This also isn’t illegal.

    This is how big money works to corrupt government. It is also the link that we have to break. Whether or not Clinton will be the person to break it is really the question. But the awareness that this sort of activity was stock in trade for Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation may at least cause some new rules to be put in place with will cover past elected officials in their transition to private life.

  26. Jeff Beamsley says:

    I now have a new “top moment” of the 2016 campaign. Hillary is demanding the FBI immediately make public all the emails it has. Surely you can join me in the irony of that.

    The Clinton campaign had been calling for the FBI and the Justice Department to release the emails that they had from the beginning of this investigation dating all the way back when Clinton turned over emails to the DOJ.

    I agree that there is some irony here, but I think it is the flip flop that conservatives and Trump supporters (including Trump) have done regarding Comey. They all suggested that he was “in the bag” for Clinton. Now they are celebrating his courage.

    The FBI doesn’t have anything. If they did, they would have said so already. There is the POSSIBILTY that they have something, but they don’t know yet because it’s going to take a lot of time to read through 1000 emails. We already know that none of the emails the FBI already reviewed (except for the 3 with the (c) mark) were marked as confidential. So people familiar with what could or should be classified are going to have to read through all of these emails to determine if any of the emails contained any information that SHOULD have been marked confidential.

    What they are likely going to find out is that most of the emails are copies of emails that they have already reviewed. The ones that aren’t parts of email chains that they have already reviewed are likely going to be emails unrelated to State Department business.

    The fact that Comey acted despite DOJ advice to hold off is the real story here.

    I think that Comey didn’t really have any choice. The FBI lost a lot of credibility in the conservative Congress because of their refusal to recommend an indictment. This was an obvious opportunity for Comey to demonstrate that he IS a straight shooter and not a political hack. Clinton probably has a large enough lead to survive this, which also suggests that Comey is a fairly sophisticated political operative. By making is announcement now, he has insulated himself from leaks within his own agency that he was covering something up. He will likely not have much more information before the election, which means that this will all go away quietly after the election is over. The risk he is taking is that he will help get Trump elected over an issue that turns out to be nothing. But he wins even in that scenario, because if Trump does manage to get elected, he will also retain the house and probably the senate. So nobody is going to come after him.

    Clinton, on the other hand, could take some action after the election, but it would not be wise for her to do so because of all of the investigations that the House is likely to spin up. If she does get elected, I think she would want to retain Comey because he had the courage not to indict, but now has regained his credibility with Republicans.

    I’ll probably post something on this last observation when I get some time, but there is a larger irony worth exploring. That irony is that the Trump campaign has insulated Clinton from the effect of this last minute “surprise” by their existing “lock her up” claims. Any voter supporting the whole “lock her up” mentality is just going to add this to their list. She had already lost their vote.

    Voters who ARE planning to vote for Clinton have already had to reject the long list of “lock her up” claims, including that she murdered Vince Foster. As a result, this “late in the game” claim, is easier for them to add to the “reject” list.

    The only voters that could be affected are the small number who remain undecided. It isn’t clear that there are enough of them to either hurt Clinton or help Trump. Whether or not this causes more people just to stay home, we’ll see.

  27. Keith says:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html

    Im trying to imagine if this would ever happen. Compared to many republicans who refuse to support Trump and publicly say so. Chris Mathews said something interesting. “We know who the Clinton’s are. They sold the Linclon bedroom by the bus load in the 90’s. For them it’s always been about money. Should we expect them to act any differently then before?”

    For me it might be said like this. I saw this movie in the 90’s. I didn’t like it then and I know the movie will be worse this time.

  28. Jeff Beamsley says:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html

    Im trying to imagine if this would ever happen. Compared to many republicans who refuse to support Trump and publicly say so. Chris Mathews said something interesting. “We know who the Clinton’s are. They sold the Linclon bedroom by the bus load in the 90’s. For them it’s always been about money. Should we expect them to act any differently then before?”

    For me it might be said like this. I saw this movie in the 90’s. I didn’t like it then and I know the movie will be worse this time.

    She isn’t going to step aside nor are the Democrats going to ask her. She is winning this election.

    If she is elected, it will be by a majority of the voters.

    I believe that she could turn out to be a great president in the Johnson mold because she is so pragmatic.

    The reality is that we live in a very divided country. Expecting that this election cycle would resolve those differences is magic thinking.

    IMHO, the divisions won’t heal themselves until the baby boomer generation steps off the stage. Then we’ll see what our children have learned from watching their parents fight.

  29. Keith says:

    I believe your last statement to be probably correct!!!!

  30. Keith says:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-the-affordable-care-acts-arizona-meltdown-1477925051

    Thoughts? If Hillary wins, single payer before she leaves office?

Leave a Reply